♪ ♪

♪

♪

>> president obama wrapping up here in miami, florida. if you missed any of his remarks, they will be available in the c-span radio library. looking ahead on the c-span networks, it is "book tv" tonight. on c-span three, american history tv looks at u.s. naval history and on c-span, a town

hall meeting the commission on political reform, a recently created group. here is a preview. you are result oriented, it is miserable. when you want to solve problems it is miserable. that is the bottom line. i am a fighter by nature. unfortunately, the process has changed in the united states senate. it is no longer reconciling differences. if either side has a position, once that fails, it means the site has to vote and they do not move to try to resolve those differences. they become irreconcilable. the question is how you get past those differences. that is the fundamental problem in the united states senate. you have more and more lawmakers in the house and the senate, 43

new senator since 2008 and then you have the 2014 election. been part ofnot the legislative body and are not familiar about how to make a law. i always threatened to go to the becomes law,bill remind everybody how it works. it is true. we do not have an amendment process, committee process, everything has broken down. i came to the sad conclusion the fight needs to be taken on the outside. that is why this is so appropriate to engage the public to demand change and to reward those that are willing to engage in consensusbuilding and compromise. and penalize those that do not. >> that event taking place earlier this month at the ronald reagan library. we will have the entire program tonight starting at 8:00

eastern including your phone calls. ,onday night on first ladies letitia tyler who becomes first taylor as john tyler assumes the presidency. she passes away a year and a half later. and julia tyler. of firstis the madonna ladies. she loved publicity. she had posed as a model at a time when that was frowned upon. she was known as the rose of long island. by all accounts she was bewitching, certainly to john tyler. he married her and she loved being first lady. she had the job less than a year but it was julia tyler who ordered the marine band to play

"hail to the chief." she also greeted her guests on a throne with her pulled plumes in her hair. almost as if she receded to that more queenly role martha washington had rejected. >> we will include your questions and comments about these three ladies by phone, facebook, and twitter live at 9:00 eastern on c-span and c- span 3 and c-span.org. the meteor exploded over a russian city last month, injuring 1200 people and causing millions in damage. that incident has prompted an interest in threats from asteroids and other objects. and how capable we are to deflect their damage. charles bolden and john holdren recently testified on the

subject. there were joined by general william shelton. this is under two hours. >> the committee on science, space, and technology will come to order. good morning. i am going to recognize myself for an opening statement and then the ranking member will be recognized as all. today's hearing is on a subject important to our nation and to our world. this is the first hearing on space threats to earth, reviewing u.s. efforts to track incoming asteroids and meteors. aware ofmany may be the subject due to recent events, it is actually one as old as our planet. i am going to hold up a copy of "time" magazine where the topic was on the cover. is 20 years, this ago. i do not know if they were ahead of their time or not but the

subject has been around for a while. this was given to me by a former staff member who had researched the subject. been aroundssue has for a number of years, there are a many questions to be asked and answers. the range is how to track an object millions of miles away to how to respond if an asteroid or meteor is headed toward her as. the harmless fly by and the not so harmless impact in russia are reminders of the need to invest in space and science. passed 17,000 miles pastors, a distance less than the earth's circumference. 50 years ago we would have been no way seeing it coming and even so it was just -- discovered by amateur astronomers. the u.s. has come a long way in its ability to track and

characterize meteorites but we still have a long way to go. has believes it i discovered 90 three percent of the largest, those one kalama toward larger. what about the other seven percent remaining, about 70 or even though smaller than one kilometer asked her to -- estimated to be in the thousands? it can an destroy an entire cit. are we tracking those? the meteor that struck russia was estimated to be 17 meters and was not tracked at all. the smaller they are the harder they are to see. yet they can be life- threatening. the scope includes participation of research institutions, industries, and amateurs in their backyard or on computers. some space challenges require innovation, commitment, and diligence. this is one of them. this committee will strive to continue to lead in this area. for all of the attention and

publicity the events of february 15 received, it was still too late for us to have acted to change the course of the incoming object. we are in the same part -- position today and for the foreseeable future unless we take actions now that improve our means of detection. part of our discussion is about how to do this in the current budget environment. i do not believe nasa is going to somehow defied budget gravity and get an increase when everyone else is getting cuts. we need to find ways to prioritize those project and squeeze as much productivity as we can out of the funds we have. examining and exploring ways to protect the earth from an asteroid is a priority for the american people, and should be a priority for nasa. we were fortunate the events of last month were an interesting coincidence rather than a catastrophe. however we still need need to make investments and improvements in our capability to anticipate what may occur decades from now or tomorrow.

that concludes my opening statement. the gentleman from texas is recognized. much, mr.ou very chairman and good morning. i would like to welcome each of .ur witnesses today i would like to thank you for your patience as we postponed this hearing a couple of weeks ago. as the chairman has indicated, this hearing was called in a response to recent events in which a large meteor unexpectedly exploded in the sky over russia, damaging property and injuring people at almost the same time a small asteroid passed less than 18,000 miles from earth. while scientists indicate those apparently were unrelated, they both serve as evidence we live in an active solar system with potentially

hazardous objects passing through our neighborhood with surprising frequency. indeed, there is increasing evidence impacts by large asteroids and comets have profound consequences for life on earth at syria's times in the past, even contribute to mass extinctions. -- various times. they are not something we want if we can avoid it. i think it as we increase our understanding of near earth objects and their potential the earth that has had congress to take the subject seriously in that regard, this committee has taken leadership roles on these issues, dating the to the efforts of former chairman george brown junior in the early 1990s. that is a time when references

to killer asteroids could lead to giggles and eye rolling. since then, members on both sides of the aisle, including former chairman hall and giffords have taken an active and productive interest in this topic and progress has been made. that today's hearing will provide us with a good update on the federal government efforts to detect, monitor, and mitigate such .azardous near earth objects much has been accomplished over the last decade and i look forward to hearing about those efforts. in addition i would like to know if there are additional steps we should be taking as a an expandedh detection program or international collaborations of such measures. where we have much to discuss today and distinguished panel to help us in oversight. i look forward to hearing from each of you. at this point i

would like to yield the remaining part part of my time to the ranking member for her comment. mr.hank you, madam and chairman. i wanted to note for the record that this hearing is part one of the examination of activities related to near earth objects. there will be a hearing of part 2 in early april. this will be a continuation. i wanted to note for the record, just a month ago after the events that made the news, my colleague that is a physicist co-authored an op-ed that appeared on february 15 trying to put into plain language what the challenges are, the research challenges, what to the threat are so the american people have some understanding that as the

chairwoman and the ranking woman have noted, it it is not too new for this committee but poses challenges for the american people, especially when it comes to resources. i think it is fitting they are considering u.s. government agency roles and responsibilities in detection, tracking, and mitigation not only because of recent events but because we have been at the forefront in setting u.s. policy for the past two decades. it was this committee that formulated the provisions in and and eight -- 2008 policy direction that called for the office of science and technology policy to develop policies on emergency response steps tocommend protecting the united states. this is dependent on nasa in contrast to the across-the- board cuts that nasa programs now face under law. mr. chairman, i am struck by how

this complex issue is and how much farther we need to go and i look forward to today's testimony. ld.h that, i yie -- without objection, opening statements will be made part of the record. our first witness is the honorable john holdren. he serves as the director of the office of science and technology policy, the assistant to the president for science and technology, and cochair of the council of advisors on science and technology. prior to his appointment, he was a professor at the kennedy school of government and the department of earth science at harvard. mr. holdren graduated with degrees in aerospace engineering and theoretical plasma physics. shelton is the commander of united states air force, space command. prior to assuming his current position, he was the assistant

vice chief of staff and the director of the air staff at the the pentagon. he currently organizes and mccains titian ready space and cyberspace forces and capabilities for the north american aerospace defense command and u.s. strategic command. from the u.s. air force academy with a bachelors degree in astronautical engineering and also holds a masters degree in his field from the u.s. air force institute of technology. our final witnesses the honorable charles bolden junior. served as ar bolden pilot in the marine corps, eventually earning the rank of general. in the course of his military career he participated in several international campaigns and also tested a variety of aircraft until his selection as an astronaut candidate in 1980. administrator bolden has held a number of positions at nasa. he was able to participate and

support several space shuttle flights and he traveled to orbit four times aboard the space shuttle, twice is a mission commander. for his achievements he was inducted into the u.s. astronaut hall of fame in may of 2006. he earned a bachelor's degree in electrical signs from the u.s. naval academy and a masters degree in systems management from the university of southern california. we welcome you all and thank you for being here. director holdren, if you will begin. >> chairman smith, raking member johnson, members of the committee, i am pleased to be here to discuss u.s. activities to detect, track, characterized near earth objects and to develop the capability to thatct any dangerous sites are discovered to be on a collision course with the earth . this is a particularly timely topic for reasons that all of you mentioned in your opening statement. near earth objects are defined as those whose orbits bring them

within 31 million miles of the earth, one third of the distance to the sun. some of them travel close enough to make an eventual collision a possibility. those with maximum physical dimension of more than a meter are referred to asteroids or comets while smaller objects are referred to as meteoroids. all are called meteors upon firing transit of the atmosphere and the pieces that strike the surface are called meteorites. enter theasteroids atmosphere each year. fourone is as big as meters. asteroids of these sizes burn up harmlessly in the atmosphere. damage on the surface is likely only when the kinetic energy of the object is in the range of a few hundreds of kilotons of tnt equivalent or above. that corresponds at the typical velocities to a stony asteroid

about 15 meters in diameter. the 17 meter asteroid that blew up over russia on february 5 teen released about 400 kilotons of energy. that much energy strike the earth every 100 years or so. our jury even select the 1908 -- , that events like 1908 level they trees over more hunt -- more than 800 square miles, are believed to be once in a thousand years. if the nacht droid explosion of that size were to occur over and -- asteroid explosion of that size were to occur over an urban area, it could cause hundreds of thousands of casualties. this is mueller than the one in a thousand probability i mentioned for one hitting the earth at all because land covers only 30% of the area of the earth and urbanized area two percent of the land area.

nearresult, the odds of a earth object strike causing massive casualties and distraction of infrastructure are very small. the consequences are so large that it makes sense to take the risk seriously. both the congress and recent administrations have done so. 1998, nasa was tasked with locating at least 90% of all n.e.o.'s with a kilometer of nine kilometers or greater. in 2000 five, congress directed nasa to detect and catalog and characterize 90% of all n.e.o. 1 h a demand -- diameter of meters. that is much more challenging

but work is proceeding apace. a recent legislation directed the office of science and technology to develop a policy for notifying relevant authorities of an impending threat, to recommend an entity responsible for protecting the earth, and threat notification. in october i reported on our progress on those tasks. for the near earth object observation program has increased about five fold since 2009, from a little less than $4 million to $20.5 million. beyond detection and tracking, the administration is committed to exploring and developing the capabilities necessary to protect the earth in general and the united states in particular threats.o.

we coordinate with homeland security, including the federal emergency management agency. i thank the committee for its continued to some port and its interest in this issue when i will be pleased to take any question the members may have. >> thank you, dr.. -- dr. holdren. >> it is an honor and privilege to appear with me colleagues and teammates in the space community. space situational awareness underpins our spectrum of air force space command. we are proud of our crucial role in monitoring activity in the space domain. specifically, we provide capabilities employed by the united states strategic command to come -- identify, track, and characterize human made objects in earth orbit. our sensors are also capable of detecting natural phenomena

however the current capability to detract asteroids is otherent on nasa and organizations such as the massachusetts institute of technology. for example, during the recent asteroid only 12 event, the , we used 2012 event data at the jet propulsion laboratory to provide screenings to ensure the safety of our satellites. we remain committed to working closely with our partners to ensure comprehensive space situational awareness for the nation. i thank you for the opportunity to appear before you and i look forward to your questions. >> administrator bolden. ,> members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to appear today to discuss the topic of near earth orbits. before i begin, i would like to

congratulate you on your appointment as the new chairman of the house science space and technology committee and i look forward to working with you in that capacity. i would also like to thank you and congresswoman edwards for the recent op-ed you wrote that calls more attention to this for the american public, which is really important. the events of february 15, 2013 are a reminder of why nasa has devoted a great deal of attention to near earth objects and why this hearing is so timely and important. -- events of th every 14 february 15, the prediction of a small asteroid called 2012 da14 and the unpredicted asteroid 15 miles above russia the doctor holdren talked about have focused public attention on the necessity of tracking asteroids and other near earth objects and protecting our planet from them.

something this committee and nasa has been working on for over 15 years. again, nasa has been focused on tracking asteroids and protecting our planet from them well before these current events. in fact, nasa's focus is evident from our five fold increase in the budget since 2010. dozens of people are involved with some aspect of our n.e.o. research. to the resources nasa puts into understanding asteroids, the agency partners with university astronomers, space science institute, and other agencies across the country that are working to track and better understand the use near earth objects, often with grants other contracts from nasa. public attention is not hard to understand. the coincidence of having these very rare event happening on the same day, along with the unfortunate injuries of over 1000 people in russia, made this a very big news event.

we should remember that the probability of any sizable n.e.o. impacting the earth is extremely remote. to put these recent events in context, very small objects enter the atmosphere all the time. the current estimates that are on average 80 tons of material in the form of dust and meteoroids enter the atmosphere every day. objects the size of a basketball arrive once a day. objects as large as a car about once per week. the atmosphere protects us from these objects. almost all are destroyed before hitting the ground and pose no threat to life on earth. however, the potential areequences of an impact potentially great. consistent with nasa's role, they have taken a leadership role to pursue capabilities to detect, track, and characterize

near earth object to reduce the risks of harm to humans from an unexpected impact on our planet. nasa is also developing new capabilities, including a multipurpose vehicle which will enable human exploration of the solar system beyond low earth orbit. as the president said in his only 10 speech at the kennedy space center, nasa's intention is to send astronauts to an asteroid for the first time in history. nasa is working to accomplish this mission by 2025. nasa leads the world in the detection and characterization of n.e.o.'s and has discovered about 98% of them. i will take a risk -- there him enough.carhart as shown in this graphic, the discovery of near earth -- right started picking up in 1998 with the start of the spaceguard search program. the number of known near earth asteroids has grown from a few

hundred to almost 10,000 in just 15 years. it is not insignificant that it coast almost -- when you look at congress, nasa, and the administration picked up the emphasis. nasa continues to make progress toward the goal set for us by the congress. over 9600 asteroids of all sizes have been found. larger ones pose a great threat to the planet and the percentage of those we have identified tracks this relationship. we have found 95% of the largest n.e.o.'s over one kilometer in size. we have also found about 60% of the n.e.o.'s between 300 meters and one kilometer. some work to do to find's in the next class. you can see the total discovered and you can see where we are lacking as the sizes go down.

our observations have been augmented by close-up reconnaissance data from our science missions. there were two belts on these arrows. last august, our sacred -- spacecraft departed and is on its way to a 2015 rendezvous. the solar system's largest asteroid. nasa's mission will return a sample of up to 2.2 pounds from an asteroid to earth in 2023. of course, we are working to accomplish an astronaut visit to an asteroid by 2025. this mission and the precursor activities that will be necessary to ensure its success should result in additional insight into the nature of n.e.o.'s will increase our ability to approach and interact with asteroids.

nasa has a history of observing comets and asteroids but as their import and has become apparent, nasa has increased his program of detection, reconnaissance, and characterization. we have gained an understanding and we are making progress in assessing the risk to our planet from smaller, but still dangerous objects. while we emphasize the risk from impacts are remote, we remain committed to fulfilling our responsibility to find and track near earth objects. we will continue to update the congress and the world on what we find. thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. i look forward to responding to any questions you may have. >> thank you, administrator bolden. let me address the first question to dr. holdren. there seems to be a general agreement we are able to detect

90% of the near earth objects that are larger than one kilometer. somewhere around 60% of the objects that are over 300 meters. my question is, i have not heard or seen what percentage of the near earth objects that are 100 meters, what percentage are we you to detect gecko described in your written testimony the size of a city destroyer. what percentage of the 100 ?eter objects can we detect do you have a figure for that jacko >> at this point i be ave that number would little under 10%. andnumber for 140 meters above is 10%, 100 would be under that. ?> you agree with that >> yes, sir. that was on the second chart i showed where it looks like less than 10%.

>> how many objects are we talking about we might not be able to detect? >> numbers of objects, i do not know that answer. that is one thing i cannot say for the record. >> what was the 10%? >> the estimates of how many in the range of 140 meters or above are between 13000 and 20,000. that is the number we have detect a 10%. the much more challenging goal, which the congress put before us. 2020. those by >> almost 2000 objects that are city destroyers, we are not detecting. >> more. because the number we are 13,000-g is 10% of

20,000. you are going the other way. unfortunately the number unprotected. >> that is why i said 2000. >> the number of undetected city killers is very large, in the range of 10,000 or more. --not to reassuring but is what is reassuring is the unlikely had one of those would actually hit a city. two percent-three percent are the first area is an urban area. thank you. whatistrator bolden, programs, improvements, developments can we expect in the next two years or five years to be able to better detect these thousands of objects that might be life-threatening? >> we continue our collaboration with our international partners. that is very important, as dr. holdren mentioned. it was a spanish astronomer --

>> you expect improvements in telescopes that will enable us? >> not improvements but increase in the numbers of space assets. we really need to have space a born assets. we have an agreement with a private company called b612 that will be engaged in the characterization of asteroids. be more.s there will >> what percentage of these thousands would be able to detect in the next few years that we are not detecting now? about the 140 meter class, our estimate is that the present budget levels, not the going down levels, it will be 2030 before we are able to reach 90% as prescribed by congress to detect and characterize 90% of the class.

>> thank you for the answer. that is not particular reassuring. maybe we can help with the budget. general shelton, with the department of defense where the meteor that exploded over russia? >> knocked until we were tipped off by nasa. >> that was after the fact? say it was two or three days preceding. >> before it exploded. ok. >> you said the explosion. meteortalking about the that exploded. >> we had no insight at all. >> even with satellite and everything else? >> we were aware of the event when it occurred. >> and not before. how are we going to be aware of an incoming missile if we could not detect the meteor exploding over russia? >> we were aware of the event.

>> at the time of the event. would have to take that into a different form to talk in more detail. >> that concludes my questions. mr. do -- ms. johnson is recognized. in october 2010 the congressional response to the direction in the nasa authorization described roles and responsibility for nafta -- nasa, fema, and states but who has the overall responsibility? -- who has the single responsibility to oversee these other activities? >> nasa is responsible, have the overarching responsibility.

, thenotifies fema department of defense. on the question of mitigation, the responsibility if an asteroid were discovered to be on a collision course, that would depend on the size of the asteroid and the amount of notice we had. for some deflection missions, you would not want nasa to be in charge. for other deflection missions, you would want dod to be in charge. it does not make sense from the standpoint of the mitigation mission to specify in advance which agency would do it. the notification responsibilities are unambiguous. mitigation, dos all of you come together gecko -- together? who takes the lead? >> in that event, we would certainly all come together. we are exercising those kinds

of communications. there is actually an exercise coming up in the middle of next month when we will exercise those interactions and the exercise of responsibility. there is a workshop actually at the beginning of next month in which those interagency interactions will be furthere discussed on delineating. >> thank you very much. the gentleman from california is recognized. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. we are talking about space debris and near earth objects. it seems to me these issues are not just american issues. we are talking about the cost of all of this, what do we talking about in terms of over , the cost of actually

coming up with a system of deflection and the cost of actually making the determination of what is coming in our direction? any estimates? >> i can give you an estimate right now. incrementally. we believe we have to detect and characterize first. withhen concern ourselves who is going to do the mitigating action or the deflection action. we have two concepts, one is about three quarters of a billion dollars for an in for aid -- infrared sensor in space, something that orbits venus. their estimate is about half $1 billion. we are roughly in that range.

>> just for that one sensor? >> that is to try to put something in space that would help us identify and characterize. i think all three of us agree, ground-based systems are great. if you really want to find a near earthroids, objects early enough, you want that vehicle. >> the cost is -- >> i gave you an example of two. asking for is a lifecycle cost for a program. we have not developed that. >> it is in the billions of dollars. >> yes, sir. if one detection devices almost a billion. >> let me suggest that perhaps -- that would provide protection not just for the united states but the world. >> anything we're talking about ,, this is not an american issue. thehing we do protect

planet. anything our international partners do, protect the planet. that is why you hear me talk about the origins of international collaboration. >> i want to ask you, what steps have we taken to bring countries together that could contribute those billions of dollars as well as around? >> the un organization has a iny active, ongoing activity trying to help bring nations together, looking at detecting and tracking n.e.o.'s. >> there is not just one organization that is aimed one was the last meeting of groups of people representing countries that might want to get involved and contribute and have an overall plan?

>> i can take that one. there was a meeting in vienna this year, just a month ago, under the auspices of the un committee. a was agreed to stand up network and to stand up as well an international body that would deal with the mitigation question. there is already something asteroid impact and deflection assessment, which is a joint effort of the european space agency and nasa. i should add the detection network we already have is highly international. it was actually a spanish observer who first discovered the asteroid that made the near miss on february 15. the minor planted -- planet is actually under the

overall auspices of the international union. it is all very international. >> i would suggest the cost of deflection, we are talking about and having detection a deflection system is even more, i would suggest this is one area of leadership the united states could really take a role in and would be good to create an international spirit of what we want to create. i would suggest, especially including russia in on this. he may be able to make some major contributions to save us some money and make it a more effective system. like tot said, i would include all countries, except china. thank you. >> the gentlewoman from maryland is recognized.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to ask dr. holdren, the the synoptic telescope, which is intended to detect and catalog hazardous objects. what i would like to know, what the technological contribution would be if it were make the overall detection effort possible. you-- general bolden, talked about the prospect of a land-based system versus systems that we would put outside in our solar system. the cost, it seems, would be different. then i would like to have some

understanding of whether there might be some cost sharing that nasa might consider with improvements to try to optimize it for use and get a sense as the challenges we are facing in not meeting the 2025 deadline we have highlighted from the committee -- are those technological challenges, are they funding challenges? is it some combination of cooperation challenge? i would like to better understand that, especially in this fiscal environment. a start and then i will turn it over to administrator bolden. synoptic survey telescope would be an important addition to our capabilities but it is important to understand all of these capabilities work in tandem. they share information, some of the telescopes are better at

detection, others better at characterizing the orbit or they reflectivity and the likely composition of the object. one always has to think of this as a network. we have telescopes in arizona, italy, the czech republic. they are all linked together and they are all part of a network that provides the overall capability we have to detect these objects. when it comes, fully to fruition, would still not be able to enable us to identify and characterize 90% of the objects in less than a dozen years. but in combination, the lsst and an orbiting telescope that

administrator bolden was talking about, could lower that time to something like 6-8 years. wethe only thing i will add, flew an infrared imaging satellite and then we repurposed it to look for asteroids. we discovered hundreds in the solar system,the the universe, actually. it is that type of instrument i talk about. .hat is what b612 wants to do we are looking at ways to cost share. the new organization mentioned involving russia, the five member organizations of what we call the international space station team, that is 15 european nations, russia, canada, the united states, although our primary

responsibility is operating the international space station when the heads of agencies get together, we talk about everything. one of the big things is the threat of near earth asteroids. at risk of getting in trouble, because the congressman and i have a healthy agreement to disagree, and i will say this, it is the decision of this congress as to whether or not we ever cooperate or participate with china. it is the elephant in the room. i do not talk about it because my public medications people tell me not to. but i do not deal with china by direction of this congress. there the only agency of federal government that does not have bilateral communications with china. this is an issue for the world. this is not an issue for the althoughtes, congressman rohrabacher and i -- >> i will let him take his time talking about china. i am sure we could have a hearing on it. i will want to general bolden -- the whole identified mission

the president has set out, it seems rather lackluster. i have always had questions about whether that should be a goal or should we think about the trade-off. isthe gentleman from texas recognized for his questions. thank you, as we all do, for holding this very important hearing and i thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony. i had the privilege of serving .n this committee since 1981 this topic has been the subject of periodic review and legislative directive. in the 1990s, during consideration of a bill, this matter came up and it was really a discussion about asteroids. there was a hearing on asteroids.

was reported one had just passed to the earth that no one knew anything about. it missed us by 15 minutes. i hated to ask, was that as good as missing us by one minute or what? just the enormity of damage it could do to us. to set an amendment goal of finding and catalog and ,- cataloging all of this other countries were invited to that hearing. but also told we should have a world group because as charlie said, it is a world problem. they were interested in inending but not contributing anything. so none of them showed up for the hearing. as the witnesses stated, from 1998 until 2011 more than 90%

of near earth objects have been located. today we know more about them but we also have more work to do. especially those that are smaller and could still have a devastating impact if they hit the earth. dr. shelton, what capabilities we need that we do not currently possess to detect and track asteroids that might pose a threat to the earth? >> if you're talking about the department of defense -- >> what do we have to do? what should we do? >> if you are talking about department of defense, we are focused on things in earth orbit. we have as, and variety of them, are not focused on beyond the earth. >> once an object has been identified, what are our means of tracking it and how much time do we have to prepare? >> maybe i can take that, congressman hall. how much notice we have depends

on the size of the object. the bigger it is, the further away we can see it and the more time we have. there are some objects we know are coming years in advance. there are other objects that are big enough to cause damage that we only know about weeks in advance or days in advance. we need to improve the capability to give us a large amount of notice, enough to mount a deflection mission, if we see one on a collision course. some of the capabilities we have been talking about, the large synoptic survey telescope, the orbiting telescope that the foundation is developing, all of those will increase the warning time with respect to asteroids big enough to do serious damage. the deflection options

that would be open to us would depend on the size of the object in the amount of notice we have. they would include -- >> excuse me, the one that hit , that is all we know about it. why didn't we know that was coming? of the sun,ut congressman hall. it came from a direction where are telescopes could not look. we cannot look into the sun. we should be able to do something no matter where it comes from. >> that is one of the reasons an orbiting telescope is -- >> you know more than we know about it. the mostd say important single thing we could do to improve our capacity to would be anroids orbiting infrared telescope that the b612 foundation is working

on. one coming toward omaha, what could they do about it? they said they could use a laser. i went on and asked a second question, could be laser hit it in the middle? i did not want to cause any more trouble than i had with mr. rohr bakker, if half it hit los angeles and new york, i suggested half of it might go to the pacific ocean and the atlantic ocean. they did not have an answer for that. i doubt if you have. >> first of all, it would not be practical to have a laser our florida to split it in half. what you you can do if you have a powerful laser is to cause material heated by the laser to fly off of the asteroid.

that is essentially the equivalent of a jet engine pushing the asteroid off course. there are other approaches to deflecting an asteroid, including hitting it with a very heavy impact. they include approaching it, as we have approached with robotic proceeds -- robotic probes. will write you a letter for more. i yield back my time. >> thank you, mr. hall. those were interesting answers. the gentlewoman from oregon. >> thank you very much and thank you, all, for your interesting testimony. it has been well established in this testimony that the probability of an occurrence of a sizable n.e.o. is quite small. saidieve general, you extremely remote in your testimony. it is also clear the consequences could be enormous. depending on the size of an asteroid, it could bring a cloud

of dust rivaling the most powerful volcanic explosion. or depending on where it hit, could cause a soon on the that would flood and destroy coastal regions. are all striving to find the appropriate balance for investment without being unnecessarily alarmist. , thee district i represent threat of a synonymy, especially from earthquakes, that is a very real priority issue for my constituents. in fact, we passed a bill that required the state to plan for the impact of a 9.0 magnitude earthquake and a resulting tsunami. scientist had determined it would occur -- will occur at some point in the future. it is not planning for if but when. the state released its plan, which was funded through a female grant in february. -- fema grant in february.

a significant focus on of course this type of challenges have implications in today's conversation. how much do we plan for detection and how much do we plan in response? we should be investing in the science that helps us to detect but we also need to look into how we will respond if it is not possible to spot these from colliding. ur 2010 report says that defend depending on the location where it hits, fema can help with personnel. can you talk more about how fema is approaching this role? how will they take into account geographsics and

demographics in the area? >> as we fema has a wide range of responsibilities to respond to different emergencies and disasters. we're in the process, as i mentioned, conducting exercises of various kinds in which that fema is a participant and thinking about and trying to work out the detailings of the response strategies. as your question points out, those impacts could be different. if a large asteroid strikes the ocean the impact will come as a tsunami. that is something that fema must also recognize that tsunamis can occur in other ways. urbantrike occurs over an

area it can cause a massive earthquake, which is another event that fema is able to respond. these are big challenges. i will not minimize the difficulty of responding adequately if an asteroid strike should occur in the size range that we need to be particularly worried about. >> what efforts are being made o engage the existing response infrastructure? >> we're exercising those with table top exercises and larger scale exercises in which the various agencies simulate an event of this kind. those kinds of exercises are the best way we have when combined with an it willal tools on how to -- analytical tools.

>> do you have any comments about finding that balance in preparing for detection and how we respond? >> i would echo what you said. you hit the right word and that is balance. we could come out of this hearing and we could decide we want to pour money into detection and characterization but that is not right thing to do. there has to be a balance. my recommendation is that the president's budget from 2013 was pretty good. we have a plan that dr. holdren talked about but it depends on the passage of that budget. in 2014, we'll try to come back again and give you what we see as a plan that dr. hold rep addresses. that is when we need to get congress in addressing how to have that proper balance. >> i yield my time.

>> the gentleman from alabama is recognized. >> thank you. reading from dr. holdren's testimony it says "depending on its composition and velocity of an asteroid could have an impact nergy and the range of 50- 500ing me gal tons equivalent and could cause destruction over a large region." i have other notes here that suggests that the atomic bombs was 13 kilo tons, which is much, much smaller. if you could please describe with greater details by what you ean by a "large region?" >> the size you're talking about, the 140 meters and you've got the numbers right.

it could devastate the better part of a continent. >> we're talking about a very large region? >> the only fortunate thing is that the estimatedinging frequency with which objects of that size strike the earth are one in 20,000 years or the probability of one in 20,000 each year. this falls in the category that we were talking about, low probability, high consequence, therefore, we need to take the risk seriously. we need to make the investments that would enable us to deflect an asteroid of that size where one to be discovered on a collision course. >> you used the word destruction in the context of this common size area. would human life be able to with stand that kind of impact in the way you use the word

destruction? >> clearly, an an asteroid of that size struck on land there would be a large loss of life. if it struck in the ocean it would produce a large tsunami, which is associated with loss of life. if you say, would humans survive on the earth the likelihood is yes. but there are concerns about the dust and smoke that could be lofted into the atmosphere by the impact. >> you think humans would survive if you limited to the continent. could, a bigger continent be a destroyer and a bigger one could a civilization destroyer. the one that hit 65 million years ago led to the destruction of dinosaurs it is believed.

>> that was roughly 10 kill lammer thes, estimated size? >> yes. >> moving on. looking at the notes that i've been given, we've identified so far thousands of objects in space, near earth objects in space that are 300-500 meters in diameter, roughly 1,200 that are 5-00 to 5,000 in dime amer the nd roughly 900 that are even larger. what i would like to know, how much advanced warning would the earth's population need, say one of these kilometer or larger-sized object for us to be able to do something to prevent that object from hitting the earth and causing the massive devastation that you have

described? >> today, we would need years to mount such a mission. over time, as we develop our capabilities to district attorney deal with this kind of threat the time could be smaller. >> let me focus on that. how many years do we need? let's say we found out today -- there's an object of the size and it is going to hit the earth. how many years to we need today to put ourselves in the a position to save the planet? >> i think i will refer that question to general bolden. >> if we did it according to the president's budget 2025 is the time we think we can send a human to an asteroid. >> let me interject for a moment. let's assume that one is going hit the planet.

i will assume that we're going to accelerate thing as fest as we can. what is the fastest we can protect ourselves? >> i will take it to the record and get back to you. ow you're talking an intense effort. that would shorten the time. we have the assistance and technology available now to do that. you're talking about pouring unlimited funds into that, you can do it in four or five years -- don't quote me on a number yet. i will get back to you. i will work with general shelton and we'll get you an answer. >> thank you for being here and estifying before us. thank you, mr. chairman for whatever time you have allotted. whatever time that is i will be pa glad to help you shorten it. > general bolden i represent

livermoore california. i imagine that when you talk about systems and technology and if we were to require a weapon to deflect an near-earth object that was incoming, some of that technology has been or will be designed at one of those laboratories? >> is that a question? >> yes. >> i gould back to what dr. holdren said earlier. i will not consider a weapon, you know, to deflect or to save earth against this type of threat. i would consider the development of appropriate technologies that could enable us -- you're talking about deflecting -- i mean it is a tiny amount if you catch it far enough out. >> let's assume it is late stage

detection. i imagine that our choices are limited, right? >> yes. i don't do bombs and rockets. >> i imagine they would play a critical role if we have late-stage detection of one of these near-earth objects? >> yes, sir. there are only a limited number of ways to generate the amount of energy that is required and we're talking about nuclear energy here. >> is there a way to guarantee that one of these near-earth objects does not hit on a friday? all the federal employees are furloughed on fridays. i know and congresswoman's edwards' district, i think they are furloughed on friday too. >> no, sir. >> we're not planning to furlough employees. they will be there on friday.

but in seriousness, i have to go back to say several things. one, these are remote occurrences. two, the plan that the president put forward, i think will adequately address our technical capability to be able to deflect an asteroid in due time. if we find there is -- we're tracking literally thousands of asteroids today. if the civilization destroyer that dr. holdren talks about -- i mean if we can't discover that early enough that there is something wrong with our systems. >> so in our district, it is fact there are furloughs at our nuclear laboratories. you're not concerned at all if the sequestration affects -- >> that was not the question. i'm very concerned about the affects of sequestration. yes, i'm very concerned about

the affects of sequestration on all of our ability to do what you ask us to do. you're talking about impacting our ability to keep our facilities operating safely, you're talking about -- just the mental strain on our employees not knowing they can come to work tomorrow. i try to ensure them every time i can that i'm not planning to furlough anybody. they know better than i do, congress can take some action and all of a sudden the administrator does not have a conclude what he's talking about because he has to lay people off. my intention is not to do that. is there a bad affect to sequestration? yes, sir. >> that was my question. >> yes, sir. >> just about my every waking moment these days is based on this topic. i've just pulled the trigger of in reductions.

20% cut until pay to my civilians, there are resources used for missile warning and missile defense that we won't be able to operate at full capability, there are programs that we can't operate at full capability in space. >> does that make us less or more prepared to handle a near-earth object? >> that is not what we do, that is nasa's responsibility. >> if you had to focus on something in earth's orbit would it make you less or more prepared? >> we are clearly less capable under sequestration. >> thank you. i yield my time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank all three of your for your detailed written testimony.

you use a lot of facts that i frequently refer to that clearly indicates it is not a matter of if but when civilization will be threatened by an impact. impact,e recent russian quite a few people who were aware of this were on the cooky side. one good thing about that is maybe it is a little bit of a wake-up call to reality for some people. dr. holdren, you're testimony referred to the first ever xercise -- the deflexion exercise. i wonder if you can share with us a little bit about how that went. -- the first ever

impact was a connectic of an asteroid of medium size, which while interesting from the standpoint of the deflection it generated, it did not have the capability that you will need from a late notice for an asteroid of that size. it was an interesting demonstration. one of the things i would like to reinforce that the president's proposal to land u.s. astronautings on asteroids by 2025, will in fact, exercise a number of capabilities that would be necessary to have in tool box should an asteroid of threatening size be course. on a collision

i think this is a crucial program and i think it is -- i ink it is going to lead to major advances in capabilities that are not just interesting to temperature straret at a small scale but not enough to deal with a real threat. >> i took her comment that she thought it was lackadaisical but necessary. >> for the record i did not say that word. >> the ranking member asked about protocol, who is in charge . we got about three or four minutes of chatter but we never got an answer to who is in charge. rather than ask, the next final you come before us you tell us

who is in charge here, here's in charge here. t is a protocol, i know you're going to coorp operate if we have an impact. but a good segment of the population thinks if we call brules willis and now we don't have a shuttle anywhere so that is impossible. things that beg for an answer, scary of course that we only know about the 10% of the huge threats. we virtually have no idea of the small threats like the one that went undetected -- the recent impact in russia. what would you do, even a small one like the one in russia headed for new york city in three weeks. hat would we do?

bend over and what? >> congressman, i have to go back to what i said before. these are rare events from the information we have on asteroids that we discovered of all sizes, we don't know of one that will threaten the population of the united states in three weeks. we are trying to diligently, as i said before, with the president's budget to put ourselves in a position that wed a vans the technology that three weeks is not something that causes us to panic because we're able to respond. we are where we are today because you told us to do something and between the administration and the congress, the funding to do that did not -- the bottom line has always -- the funding did not come.

i don't care who's fault it is or if it is anyone's fault. we all know what we're facing today and we're all sitting here today as the continuation and the administration tries to figure out sequestration, something that never should have happened but we're facing it today. if it is coming in three weeks, pray. if we find out that right now -- that's not being >> that's reality. >> that's not policy. i love what the pope is doing d i'm a practicing episs co-pailian. you have to pray. >> there's more public awareness of the importance of space to the survival of our species and it is not some unknown point in the far distant future that we can't imagine. >> if i say -- you said something that is so important. it would very easy for this

congress and the administration to say -- we get the question all if time, why are we worried about exploring beyond earth's orbit? why can't woe put it off for four, five, 10 years? the reason i can't do anything in the next three weeks because for decades we have put it off for the next five or 10 years. we don't have contractors who go away from doing their job and in five years from now, we call them and say we want to build a rocket. they will tell us with whom. all those guys went and they are selling pizza. sorry, this causes me to lose my temp sometimes because this is important. the president has a plan but that plan is incremental. we cannot like him, we cannot agree with him, we cannot do a lot of things. it is the best plan we have.

if we want to save the planet, because i think that's what we're talking about, then we have to getting together, that side and that side and decide how we're going to execute that plan as quickly as possible. that's all i can tell you. >> thank you. >> the gentleman from california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the use of the term civilization threatening or civilization destroying asteroids, remind me what size such an asteroid would e? co almoster the would be the range. it is as much or more energy that was in the combined arsenals of the united states

d the soviet unions at the eight of the cold war. that could plausibly end civilization. nobody has the mod to tell you exactly what the threshold is. when you're talking about tens of millions of mega tons you're putting civilization at risk. >> i'm hearing that we're relatively optimistic that we can develop systems at the right price points to detect asteroids of this size with a sufficient amount of lead to to be able to do something about its. >> that is size range that we've lready detected 93%-94% of asteroids of that size range that could come close to the earth. in that size range, we can be reasonable -- reasonablely

assured to go forward and be able to detect them with right a bit of notice. > let's scale it down to medium-large size asteroid, what cities would that be? >> it could be in a range of 50 meter diameter with energy in the range of 5-50 mega tons. >> what kind of systems could detect that? you're talking about more assets in our orbits, telescopes of that kind, including those this could get around the issue of the sun. >> we would want the infrared model e and an orbit that of venus. again, that is what the b612

foundation is working on. as mr. bolden mentioned, we've an an experiment with infrared telescope and is very good about finding asteroids. we talked about the cooperative nature of communities coming together but would be there with situations that would dive us? would nations be concerned about that impacting the ability to detect missiles for example? i think these are different capabilities. as general shelton mentioned, going into detail would require a different forum but they are quite different in nature from the capabilities we need to eteaningt track asteroids.

-- need to detect and track asteroids. >> did none of our current missile detecting capabilities -- they failed to be able to detect the most recent asteroid. you may not be able to answer that question. >> i can. did detect it, it was not predicted, it was detection at the time. >> so the missile detection capacity that we have now, they are more in real time as opposed to time that we might be able to remediate the problem. >> focused on two things. we see that. when it breaks ground as it is weather overhead, as soon as it breaks the clouds we can tell you. we can tell you where it is

going, where it is going to impact, so very solid missile capabilities. they can be used for other things but they can't be used for predictive things for outside the earth's orbit. >> the gentleman from arizona is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. just because i want to get my head around and try to understand some of the base level approach here. doctor, i was going to ask you first, forgive me if i'm quoting a statement to you that was in someone else's opening statement. a dang dangerous interaction, earth and object -- was the thousand one out of a year event? >> the one out after thousand year event is the one of the

magnitude that hit -- the asteroid over siberia in 1908. that was a 15-mega ton event. the dimension of that asteroid was somewhere in the range of 50 meters. >> i remember my old modeling classes. when you start getting into something that far in detail. like the person says it is a 500 year flood but we had three of them in the last 10 years because you have such -- your degree of confidence, your voice in that becomes -- it blows off the chart. we like to say one out of 1,000 but that is with a 20% lack of confidence. does that sort of math work for this? >> well, i would say certainly there is a lack of confidence of that size or greater.

but the real catch is that a one occur 0-year event could at any time. on average, because it is a one in a 1,000-year event does not mean that it won't happen next year. > so that says we can have three floods and then go years without something. in the discovery of objects out there, how much are you finding s a oming from the amateur stronmy community? i remember you telling me it was an amateur in spain that saw the last -- >> i'm not sure it was an amateur. >> i don't know, we can find out if it was an amateur, we just know it was ans a astronomier in

spain that made the discoverry. >> how formal/informal is that community out there in university,s a stron hers, scouring the sky and seeing them. how does that work? >> it is quite organized and quite formal and quite fast. that community is in constant communication. let me take this opportunity to rec meand book, that is not mine, a book by nasa's head of the near earth object identification program. it came out this year. it is called "near earth objects, finding them before they find us." he talks about the great lengths of the roles of professions and who is -- >> you're beating me to where i

want to go. is there a way to take that network and incentivize it? in e a great interest distributive information. so lots of smart people all toverl world. should we be incentivizing that? >> i think that's a great question. we are greatly in favor of crowd sourcing, we're greatly in favor of putting challenges out there. in fact, -- >> you and i are about to be really good friends. >> these challenges we already know we've used them across a domain of interesting problems. i think there's no doubt we're going to have a challenge around asteroid detection. >> it is not answerable in some 20 seconds but part of that is, ok, we see something. how far in advance would current

technology do you have to see something to analyze and determine threat assetment and react to it? the -- >> the analysis and threat assetment is pretty fast. once you see it, you have instruments and use the combination of information available from them once they know where to look in the sky to characterize it's projectry and determine if it is a threat. deploying the capability that is on a collision course, that is the issue we would have to say the time scale is in the range of years. i think administrative bolden suggested that he would get back onto the committee on that.

i think his initial estimate isle reasonable. even throwing a lot of resources at it you're talking four or five years on a deflection mission. >> mr. chairman, thank you for your patience. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i too share some of the interests in this crowd sourcing. since we've had some hearings on big data to perhaps follow-up on a later time to think about what tuments there are in other areas -- opportunities there are in other sides to collaborate on this worldwide problem. for general bolden, if you could talk about what nasa's procedure for notifying our federal agencies. what do you need to know? what trig ears notification warning? -- triggers a notification warning and how does that work?

>> we notify our state department because they notify our partners -- this is not just for asteroids, this would be for a satellite that is falling back to earth. we've had to exercise that several times in the last two years. the first person i would notify is dr. bolden as the advisory. going back to his question. there is no question in my mind who is in charge. i go to dr. holdren because he pulls the team together whether is it d.o.d. or anyone else. we would notify other federal agencies, fema, the state department, and then go from there. >> it is scenario dependent. it depends on the characterization of the asteroid . sometimes it is just a matter of saying we have something theals

is added to the inventory. it is not an earth-threatening orbit and we do that. ancould you talk if there is warning? international >> dr. holdren mentioned a recent meeting that actually the chair was an american, a nasa scientists and from that meeting came the initial decision that we would organize -- i can get you more information on what will think proposed. like everything else, it is a proposal for an international collaborative effort to do this. >> if i could add one thing to that. the center, which is located at he harvard smithsonian

observatory. it is an entity where everybody automatic feeds discoveries of near-earth objects. there is already a formal network that functions to aseemle all of the information all of the aseemable information. they know where to go. they go to the minor planet center and that goes to the that nah is a operation at j.p.l., which is responsible for working out the trajectory. the thing that is new, the international warning network, which emerged from the february 15 meeting in vienna. it will ramp up this whole effort and will add, i think addition allayers of capability as countries come together to

say given these current scattered assets what more do we need and how do we get it. >> it seems to me that is very important for several reasons. everyone is under budget constraints so we should be deploying world resources in this range. also, confidence building that i worry about from a security point of view. other countries think we could be using these technologies in a different way. so we are sharing this is a way that respects the aspects that other countries have. so if you have specific proposals as the conference goes forward, i hope you come back to us to help us bring that forward to leadership about new opportunities that, in fact, will be lifesaving, planet saving potentially but will require greater collaboration. thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> thank you. the gentleman from texas, mr. weber is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. holdren you said that the asteroid that hit siberia was 15 mega tons. what was the name of that event? >> tungsk. >> do you agree there were there 140 metersobjects -- so the number would be somewhat larger for asteroids, 100 meters and above. how close is the nearest one? >> it is not a question of how close it is now, the question is how close will its orbit take it to the earth in the near future. as administrator bold ensaid

that none of these asteroids that we found are in a collision course with the earth. >> ok. russia was hiten by an asteroid and it was not detected. >> that is correct. when i asked the question how it happened, it came from -- >> when something comes out of the sun, directly at it, at some point we're able to identify it. general shelton you said how much time do we is that 10 minutes, two hours? what point is it identifyable when it get to the earth's atmosphere? >> i have to re-emphasize. we talk about three-week scenarios. that is so unlikely. the occurrence in russia. that was not a city-threatening -- physical you were in russia

that is a significant event that is not the size of the city threatening, or the region threatening. >> can you give me a time frame when one is actually in the -- >> it is my belief that we can identify in sufficient advance those that are the are the big threats. but we need to do better. >> ok. we had a telescope for a long time and now we replaced it -- >> it is still up. >> we have a better telescope up? >> we're a little ways away. 2018 will launch the james telescope. that is not in the asteroid neo identifying -- they are looking at different things. >> given the scenario of low funding and time being of the essence could we make that change so we can add on to that telescope so we can get it up in

space? >> no, sir. very simply, no, sir. >> we can't do that? >> we would not want to do that, sir. we have mentioned, collaboration with private industry and private organizations like b612, i don't want anyone to think that b612 is going to save the planet. but they are doing what they need to do to -- >> that was my question that particular telescope. it orbits the earth every 91 minutes. ? >> that is right. >> how much role to do they play? >> we don't utilize it at all. we are learning every single day that the i.s.s., we thought it was not a platform you would want to do for earth sign, it is turning out to be a great platform. we have a solar experience going

up but that is not -- >> six hours, six days, six weeks? >> i would not want to fool anybody that i.s.s. is going to answer this question. the types of things that dr. holdren mentioned and what i mentioned is the way we should go. >> two final questions. ? o monitors these screens does it ding your iphone? someone has to watch these instruments 24/7, who does that? >> it happens at the minor planet centers. >> the final question. so you explode an asteroid. total we know we get discentury investigation? how do we know that we don't have one big object coming or

several small objects coming up? >> we don't know. that is why that is not a good option to explode something that close to the earth. >> thank you, i yield back. >> thank you. i forget who it was talked about an asteroid hitting an ocean and causing a tsunami. i december -- guess depending on the size of that will answer this question but how far inland will an asteroid make water come in? that was really interesting to me? >> there's a very interesting discussion on exactly that question in the book. the answer is we really don't know because the dynamics of tsunamis caused by asteroid

impacts are, number one complicated and not adequately investigated. it depends on many factors, including on the slope of the bottom of the ocean and it depends on a lot of other character eistics that the asteroid imle pacts. there is no simple answer to that question that we can give at this time. >> what about asteroids hitting other, you know, planet systems or what kind of research do you have on that? >> well, there are a lot of craters out there. there are craters on the moon from asteroid impacts, which we can see clearly. >> any recently that you -- any recent craters on the moon? >> i would have to get back to you on that. i'm not sure what the most ecent impact on the moon is.

but there is also lots of evidence of asteroids bashing into each other. if you look at the large asteroids throughout they are pitted with craters themselves from bumping into each other. >> thank you. >> the gentleman from utah, mr. stewart is recognized. >> thank you gentleman for your time and -- i know you and your careers and i have respect for that. general bolden, we spent time talking the other day. i know you're a former marine pilot and i'm a former air force pilot. my question for general shelton, you're understanding as it is mine that air force pilots are the best pilots in the world. >> i'm going to have to say yes on that.

[laughter] ask m glad i was able to that question. [laughter] >> fighter pilots of all service on the air force. >> you're a bigger man than i am because i've never landed on a carrier. the first question i have is we spend a lot of time talking about detection avoidance and the uncertainties about that. i'm curious about public policy, if we determine there is a threat and we determine it is potentially devastating. do we have a policy as to whether we will share that information with the public and how we do that? dr. holden, i guess that is more appropriate for you. >> my expectation would be that we would notify.

but the first thing that would happen if information came in indicating that an asteroid had been detected to be on a collision course with the earth and big enough to do serious damage, it would be what happened after the earthquake in tsunami. the there would be a gathering in the situation room within minutes. we would have the joint chiefs of staff, the secretary of state, the head of fema, the head of nasa, the head of homeland security, and general shelton. there would be an intenses discussion of the whole range of actions that the government would take in order to deal with the threat, whatever it was. in that meeting, unquestionably there would be a discussion of who to notify and how fast and in what form.

>> i'm not advocating one way or the other but have you determined the protocol for advising the public? is that part of that matrix? >> i don't know if fema, which uld have that responsibility has developed a formal protocol. we can get back to you on that. >> i wish you would. i'm not sure physical i'm not that bright. but the saying we don't know what we don't know. you said we discovered 94% of the asteroids. if we don't know what is out there will, how do we know that we discovered 94% of them? >> that is a good question. there are subtle statistical chniques that depends on fracking -- what fraction of the population that you've seen. that is described until clear

detail in the book. it was the best explanation that i've seen. >> so you're drawing conclusions but you're fairly conclusion. >> you're drawing conclusions sampling?ampleling -- yes. is the united states the lead on this? are other nations contributing to this in a meaningful or is almost our entirely ourests that are meaningful here? >> absolutely there are other countries con contributing to this. here's another one in -- the l.l.s.t. will be in chile and some in australia.

this domain is remarkable for he degree of international cooperation compared to others that we're not that far along. >> as it should be. those other entities, are they funded with -- they are not with american funding at all those are independent funded efforts? >> they are not entirely independently funded. funded byope is being the n.s.f. even though it will be in chile. the radio telescope in puerto rico is funded by n.s.f. >> so they are located around the world they are primarily u.s. efforts? >> i would have to get back to you on the distribution of the funding. there is funding from the european space agency, there is

funding from italy, germany, but i cannot give you a percentage. >> if you would, thank you. i yield back. >> the gentleman from florida is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we could spend $1 million on space threats, we could spend $1 billion or $1 trillion. i want to hear from each one of you on how much we should spent. i want to hear a number or a formula or some sort of list that you think must be done with regard on what will they cost. let's start with you dr. holdren. >> the national academy of sciences a couple of years ago came out with a report where they address this question. they looked at what you could do for $500 million a year, what you can do for $1 million a year

and what you could do for 50. on the basis of that, if we're just looking primarily at the detection and characterization, then i think we would want to be spending upwards of $100 million a year. if we're looking at, i think as mitigation ll, at then you would have to include carrying out the president's goal by 2025. various aspects have been put forward on doing that but that would be in the range of $2 billion or more sprovered the time between now and 2025. >> thank you. general shelton. >> we're talking about orbit into the surface of the planet. just that part of the space

're responsible for probably 200-$300 millional year-ish. sensors that allow us to take better -- to better catalog the activity that is there and characterize it as threats grow in space. we need to be able to characterize that better than we have the capability to do today. i would say $200-$300 million range is what we're talking about. >> the only thing i would add is i want to re-emphasize. because we've identified 95% of the objects that are a kilometer and above a and we've seen none on a trajectory to earth, this is not an issue that we should worry about in the near term.

however, the president has laid out a plan and i would say that's a very good start. we have a lot of work to do but the funding that is presently laid out in the president's budget is sufficient to get us there incrementally. we just have to move the plan forward. we can't stop. that is my point. >> tell us the kind of cost we're facing if we spend nothing. but the likely cost we would face if we did nothing. let's start with you dr. holdren. >> this is a tough question. there are different ways to present these things. if you take the expected value of the damage, in terms of loss of human life, integrated over a long period of time, it comes out the estimated loss of life is about 100 per year.

that compares with a million per year from malaria, it comes with five million from tobacco. that does not look like a big threat. that is not a meaningful way to present the risk of this character where you're talking bigt a low probability of a disaster. in those kinds of situations we invest in insurance to reduce the likelihood of something that we consider inor the rabble. physical you're talking about a 0 columner the of of the asteroid that exterminated the dinosaurs, it is meaningful as a number that you divide by the 65 million year return time?

i think we just can't get at it that way. >> general shelton, the cost of the worst case scenario. >> from a d.o.d. perspective, we would not be able to characterize the traffic on orbit. we would not be able to avoid collisions on orbit. we would not be able to detect adverse activity on orbit. dependence on space is very high. so we could not sacrifice that. >> thank you. let me thank the witness for your testimony. thank you for being here and your expertise as well. we stand adjourned.

>> coming up next we have more on space policy from an event th frank rose the assistance for discovery and space policy. this was part of an event hosted by the international institute for strategic studies. it is about 45 minutes. >> the space and defense policy and i'm speaking about the u.s. policy and president obama's

second term. for those of you who don't know us well, it is a global think tank with our mothership in london and here in washington and singapore. those offices grew touflt dialogue that the institutes have pioneered over the past decade. these two also publishes survival, the annual military balance, the 2013 edition of which, was launched last week and the book series, some of which are on display in the back. this office is a critical part of that boder network. we see to bring a global perspective to washington and bring washington's perspective to a sometimes skeptical audience. it is a membership organization for those who aren't members

could find information at the back or on our website. enough about us. we're here to hear from frank. his potion at deputy assistance secretary, frank is responsible for key issues in defense and military response policy. he held various positions in the u.s. house of represents on the house committee on intelligence and in the offices of to the secretary of defense. he received his m.a. from college in london. having worked with frank in the arms control bureau in the state department, i can tell you one more thing about him. he takes diplomatic engagement seriously. in a bureau with leadership that does a lot of travel i think frank has the record for most

miles flown. i want to use the opportunity of his rare presence in washington to let frank give to let him gie something of an extended report on his engagement over the past few years. with that, i will turn it over to frank who will speak for 20 minutes and then we will open up to questions and answers. i should remind everyone we are on the record. that kindank you for introduction. it is great to be back. as a student in london in the 1990s i spent many hours in the oldary at the isss's headquarters. i am dating myself. i am pleased to be here today to talk about space diplomacy in obama's second term. this morning i would like to focus on three issues. first i would like to outline the challenges to the space

environment, including space debris and anti-satellite capabilities. second, i will explain how president obama's 20 national policy seeks to respond to these challenges and i will describe some of the specific initiatives we are working on to implement the president's vision. let me start by discussing the challenges to the space environment. benefits of space per me a almost every aspect of our daily lives. for example, information derived usm space systems helps with natural disasters, facilitate transportation revived global access andinancial operations, other activities worldwide. however, the space environment

has changed in fundamental ways since the beginning of the space age 50 years ago. back then you had the united states and the soviet union operating space systems. operatever 60 nations space systems as well as numerous commercial and academic operators, creating an environment that is increasingly congested. for example, the u.s. department of defense tracks over 22,000 objects in space larger than 10 centimeters of which about 1100 are active satellites. there are also hundreds of thousands of additional objects aremall to track but capable of damaging satellites in orbit in the international space station. over the past five years, we have seen a germanic increase in the amount of debris as a -- a germanic increase in the amount of debris. the first was china's thai

satellite test in the second was the collision between a defunct russian satellite and a commercially operated satellite. these events are responsible for 36% of all of the trackable debris in low earth orbit. the threat to the space environment will increase as more nations develop and deploy counterspace systems. therefore it is clear that space is also becoming increasingly contested. and theirce systems supporting infrastructure face a range of man-made threats that may degrade, disrupt, or destroy assets. nationalor of intelligence james clapper testified, space systems and their supporting infrastructures enable it wide range of services. other nations recognize these

benefits to the united states and seek to counter the u.s. strategic advantage by pursuing capabilities to deny or destroy our access to space services. during will increase the next decade as disruptive and distractive counterspace capabilities are developed. irresponsible acts will have implications beyond the space environment, disrupting worldwide services upon which civil, commercial, and national security sectors depend. in particular we continue to be concerned about the development of china's altai faceted anti- satellite program. given the increasing threat through irresponsible or unintentional acts to the long- term sustainability, stability, safety and security of space operations, we must work with the community to preserve the space environment for all nations in future generations.

noting the challenges to the space environment cannot be solved by one nation alone, president obama's 2010 policy faces a high priority on extending international cooperation to maintain the long-term sustainability and security of the space environment. for example, the introduction states, irresponsible acts have damaging consequences for all of us, all nations have the right to use and explore space but with that right comes responsibilities. the united states calls on all nations to adopt approaches for responsible activities in space to preserve this right in benefit for future generations. the national space policy directs a couple of key goals related to international affairs, even include expanding international cooperation on

mutually beneficial space activities to broaden and expand the benefits of space and further the peaceful use of space. and to strengthen stability in space through domestic and international measures to promote safe and responsible use of the domain. improved information collection and sharing for space collision avoidance and strengthening measures to mitigate orbital debris. goal, the of the policy directs departments and agencies of the u.s. government, in consultation with the secretary of state, to strengthen u.s. leadership in space-related activities such as the un community and peaceful uses of outer space, identify areas for potential international cooperation, develop and pursue bilateral and multilateral transparency and confidence building measures to encourage responsible actions and preserve the space

environment through the development and adoption of policies tol minimize debris such as the united nations debris mitigation guidelines. let me discuss some of the specific initiatives we are working on to implement. hillaryry 17, 2012, clinton announced that the had decided to work with the european union and other nations to develop an international code of conduct. the long-term sustainability of the space environment is at serious risk from space debris and irresponsible actors. unless the international community addresses these challenges, the space environment around our planet will become increasingly inhabited which will create damaging consequences for all of us."

it would establish guidelines for responsible behavior to reduce the hazards of debris generating events and increase the transparency of operations and space to avoid the dangers of collisions. the united states believes that the european union' is a useful starting point for developing a consensus. participatingd to in the open ending meeting that the eu will be convening with our hosts, the ukrainian government this upcoming may. these will provide an opportunity to address all apple -- elements of the draft code. looks to findtes agreement on a text that is acceptable to all interested states and bring benefits in a relatively short term. i would also like to discuss

the work of the group of on outert experts space transparency and confidence building measures, established by the un general assembly. is to examine options for establishing bilateral and multilateral tcmb 's to help the space environment. representatives from 14 nations, including the united states, serve on this gge. the first meeting was in new york city. is to developive a consensus report that outlines bm's.t of hermetic space tc arms control is outside of it. it will hold its next meeting in

geneva next week. thegoal is to finalize report by july of this year. another area where we are discussing space security is within the group of g8, which conducted its annual meeting last may. in its role, as president last year, the united states introduced discussions on the long-term sustainability and security of the space environment within the group. in the nonproliferation director statement, it just sustainability and security in detail. outer spacer, activities play a significant role in the social, economic, scientific and technological developments of space and maintaining international peace and security. the growthcern about of orbital debris, which

presents an increasing threat to welcomedivities and the current efforts aimed at establishing a strong consensus on an international code of conduct for outer space activities. we expect space security to remain on the agenda this year with the assent of the uk. wethe multilateral level, have expanded our engagement within the united nations committee on peaceful uses of the united states on the development and adoption of international standards to minimize debris. the united states is taking an active role in the working group of the scientific -- and technical committee on long-term sustainability. will be a keyroup forum for the development of international best practice guidelines for space activities. the united states is serving as

the cochair of the expert group on space degree -- three and space awareness, demonstrating our commitment to making progress to enhance space flight safety and preserve the use of space for the long-term. the goal of the un is to finalize a report and guidelines by the end of 2014. let me also now discuss some of our own got -- ongoing dialogues on space and security with key nations. over the past three years, we have a number of my lateral dialogues with key nations to securitypace and issues. these include discussions with ,raditional allies, france, uk canada, japan, as well as discussions with new partners, south africa, brazil, india. we also have a robust discussion with the russian federation on space security.

we are also trying to engage china on security. we think china is important that the united states and china begin this discussion. first, the united states and inna have an interest maintaining the long-term sustainability of the space environment, especially limiting .he creation of space debris it is important we discuss these issues bilaterally in order to prevent misperceptions and miscalculations. the united states plans to continue to improve our efforts to discuss these issues with china. let me conclude by saying, as clinton said in her january 2012 statement, the long-term sustainability and the security environment is at risk and unless we take action to reverse these trends, or it have damaging consequences for all of us. , working ins

conjunction with its friends and partners, and is pursuing a comprehensive approach to responding to the challenges to the space environment. this response includes top-down political elements, like efforts to develop an international code , and technical elements like the work of the long-term sustainability working group of the un. the ultimate objective is the same -- to reverse the troubling trends that are damaging our space environment and preserve the limited list benefits of space for all nations and future generations. thank you very much and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much. aguess i will start with question before opening it up. you have discussed how the how the work is more on

a technical level. the code of conduct is top-down. where does the gge fit in and how much does the gge and code of conduct negotiations over lap or reinforce one another? >> a couple of points on that. i would say that gge is really focused on the political side of the house. it was established by the un general assembly. we will eventually present a report to the secretary-general and our guess is that he will likely send that to the un general assembly for their approval. the second point, you talked arity.complement we see these as mutually reinforcing. the work of the gge will be enforce the work we are doing in

the code of conduct. how will we make sure that happens? another good thing is that you have the same group of people that are working these issues across the foreign, for example , the u.s. resumed -- andesentative with the gge beth ee eu. my staff is working with the oceans environment and science, which has the lead for the un to ensure that everything we do is fully consistent. kind of a long answer but we differents i said, efforts but we have one objective, maintaining the long- term sustainability of the space environment. >> thanks. give yourk you to name and affiliation before you ask your question.

right here. we have a microphone coming to you. >> [indiscernible] >> that is an excellent question. theuple of points -- national space policy directs at u.s. government to look issues associated with active debris removal. that is removing large pieces of ebris in space. i always like to point out there are serious political, technical, financial and legal issues associated with that. , one person's debris removal system could be another's anti-satellite weapon. we have begun a review, which

is being led by the national security council and the office of science and technology, to implement the direction we received from the president to examine this active debris removal issue. we are very early in the process. we have had some limited engagements. what i would say, there is a lot of issues but we're looking at it closely. >> leaving aside the legality, what are some of the, since to do that? >> i know the swiss, for example, have opposed this thing like a vacuum cleaner. there are a number of other technologies people are looking at, lasers. i am not an expert on the specific knowledge ease. i am much more focused on the policy. there are also a number of other companies in the united states that are beginning to look at this. i think it is important, given

these political, financial, technical and legal issues, to study this issue and make sure we understand the application. the u.s. government has not made him -- has not made a decision on active debris removal. we are studying it. >> an adjunct professor at johns hopkins. first a comment on the finally talking about two years ago, a program on their website. you discuss some of the technology they are looking at. my question for frank, i was in a gene in january and gasping for breath, having some discussions with some counterparts. i sense that with the chinese, it would be too much to say they are favorably inclined that they are less unfavorably inclined

about code of conduct. and can yound that go into more detail about what ?ou see vis-à-vis china >> let me go back to my statement. i said the united states wants to have a dialogue with china for two reasons. an because we both have interest in maintaining the long-term sustainability of the space environment. let me tell you a story. many of you have heard this but some of you have not. jointf you know that our space operations center, which is located at the air force base in california. conjunction notifications to numerous government and operators around the world.

including china. totwo satellites come close each other, we will notify the operator so he can prevent a collision. about three years ago when i first took this job, one of these applications was brought to us, to me, to sign off. a piece of debris from china was coming close to one of their own satellites. -- whyt inclination is reward bad behavior? then i caught myself. i came to the conclusion, if china'sce of debris hit satellite, that could create more debris and endanger our satellite. i am sincere about this -- the united states wants to have a dialogue with china about this.

bruce, i have seen over the last six or seven months a much more active approach with china on china's behalf on engaging the united states on space security issues. discussions with officials. i think china is coming to the view that it is important to engage on these issues. the proof will be in the pudding. as i said before the united states believes it is vital that we have this dialogue, not just to maintain the long-term sustainability of the space environment but also to prevent misperceptions and miscalculations. the sovietstates and union did not agree on many issues during the cold war. but there was an active dialogue on these types of issues which help manage misperceptions and miscalculations. this is an important area where

we think we need to have a discussion with china. , theat i am interested in chinese expressed -- they sounded sincere for those notifications. it was not the usual propaganda. they genuinely seemed grateful the u.s. gave them notifications. frank's take two and then you can respond to them. >> i'm curious how the code of conduct, how much is there from countries like brazil and others you mentioned that you are having bilateral discussions with? thank you. raise thed to subject of the announcement the --. is going to deploy 14 you had mentioned it in our to engage the chinese, given the

inherent capabilities of ballistic missile interceptors and the fact that all of these interceptors are going to be on the trajectory of any chinese second strike attack on the united states, isn't this going to complicate our efforts to constructively engage china? >> thanks for both of those questions, even yours, andgreg. [laughter] people what we hear from around the world. i have been just about every continent -- continent except antarctica. generally when you look at the code of conduct, it is generally acceptable. most major nations say it looks pretty good. there are some changes that we would like to see, as colleagues from russia, but even

they say this is basically the .n general assembly resolution on the substance, there is a general agreement. the real challenge with the process has been a lack of outreach and the need to get that process together. i think that as a result of a couple of things. the european action service has stood up. the good news is this -- they have just appointed a new special representative for nonproliferation in poland. he is the former direct your of security policy studies as well wmdhe former head of the center. he has a lot of expertise in multilateral diplomacy. he and i have had consultations and he has had consultations

with numerous nations around the world. he understands the challenge is with the process. he is determined to get it right. i think that is the challenge with the code. ,ith regards to your question secretary hegel said the decision was stirred -- driven from the threat from north korea. we have a dialogue that my boss, , missile-er secretary defense is on the agenda. a couple of points about missile defense, the ballistic missile defense states we do not seek to undermine strategic stability with russia or china. our missile defenses are not erected against china -- erected against china. we will continue to engage china on issues. it is not going to be it is

going to be missile-defense, nuclear issues. theant to prevent possibility of a misperception and miscalculation. know the chinese have some concerns. we do not think those concerns are warranted. we will can you -- continue to discuss and engage with them on the issue. defense andmissile other issues on the bilateral agenda. >> two in the back. right there. >> frank, i really appreciate all of the outreach or office does. something that concerns me is how do you envision budgetary concerns affecting your work echo -- your work? >> can we take one more from right behind her? hi, i am steve from osd.

the first question that was about remediation. i would like to ask you about mitigation. what do you see as the top opportunities to prevent more debris? i can see strengthening the un guidelines technically or by trying to get more people to sign up to them or by strengthening our u.s. .overnment debris practices or by making more of an effort to mystically to adhere to those practices or perhaps something else. what do you see for increasing mitigation? the first question about the budget, we will have to see. right now i will continue to do what i have been doing until

they say there is no money. we will have to see. with regard to mitigation, let me start by saying i think the u.s. has one of the best records with regards to degree -- debris mitigation. this is one of the issues at the international level we are looking at in the un committee on peaceful uses of outer space. we actually have a working group on debris mitigation. leadingon my staff is that. i do not have the specifics because i am not the technical expert. i know they are looking at that in detail. when they finalize their report in 2014, there will be a couple of recommendations. at this point, i do not know bet list of technology will there. i can only say we are looking at it actively and i would say the u.s. has a good track record domestically. >> any other questions?

but to me ask frank about the code, can you talk more about what you expect from the may meeting? is it open-ended? a particular outcome, if not in may then there is a schedule of meetings? canthen a broader question, you talk about why -- implicit in your remarks is an assumption that space is not amenable to legally binding arms control measures. can you give us a bit of an explanation as to why it is more area consistent with non- legally binding treaties? >> two good questions. let me talk about the

multilateral process. as i mentioned in responding to jennifer, that has been a weak point of the eu's process. i think they understand that. what they are going to do is they have set up a series of open-ended consultations. the first meeting will be in kiev in may,. what i understand, based on my discussions, the object if it is to discuss the key issues and concepts within the code. geithner stand they will probably reduce another draft based on those discussions. and then there will be a series of additional open-ended consultations. i do not know exactly how many. i think it will depend on how long it takes to get critical mass.

with regards to your question on the nationalng, space policy does talk about legally blind -- legally .inding arms control the previous policy said the united states does not do that. this policy goes back to the long-standing principle with regards to space arms control for the united states. it says the united states will consider arms control proposals and concepts that are effectively verifiable, equitable, and in the interest of the united states and its allies. the challenge with a space arms control is verifiability. how do you verify these capabilities, which is very difficult to do. theother issue has been

issue of how you define a weapon in outer space. that has been an issue that people have been going back and forth on for over 40 years. my general view, and there is a wonderful book called "politics of space security." one of the things he argues in this book is that when there agreements and successes with regards to space security, it has occurred when there was an intersection between -- between security and preserving the space environment. for example, in the late 1950s, the united states and the soviet union tested nuclear weapons in outer space. they did it and they severely damaged their own satellites. limited test ban treaty in 1963.

it is both an environmental treaty but also a security treaty. the un debris mitigation guidelines is another example. in the are trying to do obama administration is to focus on that intersection between security and sustainability. >> ok. is there any -- right here. >> i was looking for background -- >> can you identify yourself? >> i'm with princeton university. some background on what i think .re two salient issues ,ne is that we are proceeding

2a is scheduled to be deployed. these are ready to shoot. they are fully capable of engaging satellite has deployed in their current configuration. i am sure if china were to deploy them, we would not have a lot of doubt about that as far as verifiability. we would know they are capable of engaging satellite. that is not uncertain at all. meanwhile, the code of conduct oneanguage has evolved iteration after another, more and more in the direction of not putting impediment to the testing and development and use of anti-satellite weapons but also being a missive of their possession and of their use other -- under the inherent right of self-defense, although no one would say the non-

binding code of conduct, specifically in the context of destroying satellites unless it is setting a precedent and providing an effort -- affirmative permission to use it in self-defense. obviously therefore to develop them and to possess them. it could even be fully tested without the doing a test against orbital objects. it seems to me as though we have abandoned any hope of not having a future in which many agents possessing at least anti- satellite weapons in space. >> that is the question. are dualhese systems capable systems.

you really can't verify how these systems -- what i would say, the focus needs to be upon actions. one of the key elements of the code is section 4.3 it says nations will refrain from actions that create long-lived debris in outer space. the problem we have is verification. maybe in the future we will be able to get around the issue of verification and solve that problem. anyt now we have not seen arms control treaties or proposals that meet the criteria laid out by president obama in the national space strategy. >> a quick follow-up, is that like saying we do not need nuclear arms control, let's agree not to have nuclear war?

>> what i would say, with all agreements, a key element, is it verifiable? i would argue the treaties are verifiable. i would argue space arms control with our current technology is not verifiable. >> i disagree with that. a little bit of a discussion about this before, -- i suppose missile and nuclear weapons impede on space. has ciber and cybersecurity -- cyber ciber tcbm they linked?e >> i think there is a big link, sam.

you do not have to necessarily attack a satellite in space to disable the satellite. to gois another way after these issues. there is a definite link. in our discussions with the department of defense and other elements in the u.s. government, we are talking about that. ,n addition to the space gge there is a separate information gge. i am in close contact with my colleague there. >> will that be reflected in some of these documents or will they be kept separate? >> for the time being, they will be kept separate. but as things evolve in the future, that could change. question.as another we still have time for some more.

>> bruce mcdonald again. last year on the subject of the code of conduct, some voices emerged in the congress that were opposed, not just in congress but outside as well, giving arguments such as, this is really a treaty. this short-circuits the senate, so on and so forth. and then we got into election mode and all discussions focused on that. now here we are -- i wanted to ask if you could give your sense of any readings you have in thef the attitudes senate, on the hill, toward the possibility of a space code of conduct this year and also how you might respond to those arguments you have heard. >> a good question.

we are consulting very closely with congress on the code of conduct. i spent a lot of my time briefing the relevant committees. as you mentioned, there are some concerns among some members with regards to the code. close" nation, -- coordination, we are allaying many concerns. with regard to the senate, i think it is important that the code of conduct would not create a legally blind -- binding obligation on the united states. it is not in the international agreement. i think it is also important there are a number of these --es of clinically political agreements. the bush administration concluded that un debris mitigation guidelines in 2007. in 2002, the code of conduct.

the vienna document, which was concluded in 1999. fore is a long precedent this. -- of the challenges another question we get on the why didn'tal side is the eu do this within the un? one of the challenges is that the code deals with security issues but also with sustainability issues. there is not one for him within the un that deals with these issues in a comprehensive manner. the conference on disarmament deals with security issues. this is really -- they're thinking was you need to address this issue in a comprehensive manner.

i think it is very difficult to draw distinctions tween security and sustainability issues. for example, conducting tests in space is a security issue but it is also a sustainability -- sustainability issue as well. back to your question, we are consulting closely with the congress on this. we are addressing the concerns that have been raised. i want to come to the final point, this does not create a legal obligation that would bind the united states. that is the key point. that is usually the threshold between the executive branch and congress on these types of issues. i could follow-up, there are a number of legally binding agreements the u.s. enters into. but do not require consent, is that ruled out in the case of the code?

>> it will be a politically binding agreement. i guess we have time for a follow. -- a follow-up question. >> what is special about the space environment that makes arms control not verifiable? air, orred with space, land? what is special about space it does not work? >> let me ask you this -- how can you verify, from a technology point of view, what is on the top of a satellite? you do not know. the technology is not there. all of the verification experts i have spoken to is faced with the current technology we have. it would be very difficult to be

able to tell the senate, were we to negotiate a treaty that was submitted to the advice and consent of the senate, we would have to say this is verifiable. what the experts tell me, and i am not a verification expert. what do they tell me is that they cannot effectively say this is verifiable with the current technology we have. that note, i would like to thank frank for coming here today. sharing the views on the future of engagement on outer space, see. and thank you for coming. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> here is a look at tonight prime time lineup.

on c-span, in-depth with randall looking, on c-span 3, at u.s. naval history and on c- span, a town hall meeting from the commission on political created by the bipartisan center. participants include former government officials and commentators. here is a preview. if mr.o not know that reagan could join us, if he would say, yes, sequestration would happen. i think there would have been an effort. hasink american politics migrated from an nfl atmosphere to hunger games. the nfl, you do everything possible to be victorious. you outplay your opponent. even in the nfl, an athlete

will reach down and lift their opponent back up. in hunger games, you make sure your opponent is never capable of getting up again. we need to remember that we are still americans and should be working together for the country, not just the parties. we will have that entire event later on from the ronald reagan library. we will also take your calls and the question,ng are your views represented in the u.s. political process you go that gets underway tonight at 8 p.m. eastern on c-span. anna harrison,, whose husband dies after a month in office. letitia tyler, who becomes first .ady she passes away a year and a half later. secondyler becomes his wife. >> i think of her as the madonna of first ladies. she loved publicity.

she had actually posed as a model at a time when that was frowned upon. known as the rows of long island. by all accounts she was bewitching, she certainly bewitched john tyler. she loved being first lady. she had the job less than a year but it was julia tyler that ordered the green band to play "hail to the chief." show so greeted her guests sitting on a raised platform with purple plumes in her hair. it is almost as if she receded to the more queenly role that martha washington had rejected. >> we will include your questions and comments about these three first ladies by phone, facebook, and twitter, monday night at 9:00 eastern.

also on c-span radio and c- span.org. >> next, a book at state abortion laws in light of north dakota's new lines. -- laws. >>esme covers local issues. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me. north dakota governor signs the earliest abortion limit. what did the governor sign and why is it significant? guest: he signed a bill and what is called a heartbeat and. this is effectively out and as early as six weeks into a presidency, as soon as the

fetus's heart can be detected. it is the narrowest window of ban that we have in states right now. this goes even earlier than arkansas. host: there are two other aspects relating to the kind of fetuses that can be aborted. what are those? guest: there are four abortion- related pieces of legislation that got past north dakota. we've got a heart beat bill, the six week ban -- we have been admitting privilege bill. that is maybe more threatening to the one clinic that north dakota still has in terms of shutting it down. the third one we have is a ban on abortions sought for sex selection or genetic abnormalities like down syndrome. and we have a fourth, which will go to the voters, it will be what is called a personhood resolution, which would essentially to endow a fertilized egg with all the

rights and privileges of living human beings. those measures it all law-- outlaw abortion completely. host: in bloomberg business week, you look at what happens to a woman in north dakota that wants an abortion. what happens to a woman that wants an abortion? does she have other options? is it legal for to go outside the state? guest: is important to note that these lots will north dakota have not taken effect yet. there will not take effect until august 1. we definitely think there'll be plenty of legal challenges. these laws off and gets paid in d inet staye court. they do not take effect until years down the line. north dakota and women still have that one clinic. the state is big. the one clinic is in fargo. we already see north dakota

women leaving the state if they live and other parts of it to get an abortion. you have states like wyoming and south dakota and even canada that women can drive to. absolutely, people can go out of state to get the abortion. there are different laws depending on states. south dakota would require you to take two trips. it really comes down to personal economics, whether a woman has a car and can afford to take the time off from work and to get child care to go to seek that abortion. oscar. host: joining us for a local perspective as dave thompson. he's the director of prairie public radio in north dakota. good morning. how has this law been received on the ground? guest: it is definitely polarizing. we have people who are saying, good for north dakota. a lot of people are saying, where are we going as a state?

it is evenly divided from the calls and e-mails i have talked to. host: how did this get through the legislature? guest: the governor stayed out of it until the end. it was through the efforts of the pro-life legislators, the people who are anti-abortion who pushed this legislation through. as you see, there have been a number of bills enacted, some that might be even contradictory. however, they were basically saying to everybody who would listen that it is time to challenge roe v. wade. there were passionate debates on the house and senate floors. they did not pass by that much. if the governor decided to veto the bill, they would not have overridden the veto. the governor decided to go along and say okay, let's be the state that will challenge roe v wade. host: we're talking to the news director at the prairie public

radio in north dakota. our other guest esme deprez we might see legal challenges to this. what are the expectations, david? guest: the expectations are we will see legal challenges when the bills have been signed, everything settles down. they will now be law august 1. i know of two efforts that are being considered right now to take them to court somehow. either in state courts for a stay of the law or federal court federal court for a writ. there is another avenue, referring the loss. that is being talked about quite openly. if you get a referral gulling, wants to get the language approved that could be on the ballot, then you could get

enough signatures to stay the bill from going into effect. that effort is also being talked about. host: dave thompson, tell us about your governor, details about how this affects him politically in your state record your state. guest: my intel is telling me, governor, this might weaken him of it. he may have packed too far to the right. there are people in the republican caucus in the legislature who are questioning what he has done. if i could take a moment and say that they're telling me -- there was a constitutional amendment that will go on the ballot in 2014 that is kind of a personhood amendment that says all life should be protected, from birth until death, from conception until death -- the governor could have done that, we will veto the other bills, but see what happens in 2014

when the amendment is voted on in 2014. he did not do that. he went further. there are republicans questioning whether or not he was talking too far to the right. host: dave thompson, thank you for talking to us early this morning. esme deprez, let's follow up on a person could bill, something mr. thompson mentioned. what is that? guest: personhood measures seek to endow fertilized eggs with all the rights and privileges of living human being. what this does is that it effectively equates abortion with murder and thereby outlaws it in that way. we have seen this play out in mississippi. voters already weighed in on this issue. two years ago, they rejected a personhood amendment. in colorado, this has also been rejected. if north dakota voters to approve of personhood measure, this would be the first date to have such a thing. it is important to note that personhood measures are not

pushed typically by the mainstream anti-abortion groups. this is really something new, something we are seeing, this is not necessarily constitutional. mainstream anti-abortion movements do not see this as a good way to tackle the heart of roe v wade and to get abortions no longer possible in this country. host: we're talking about north dakota. you mentioned arkansas. what are other states that are seeing more conservative abortion measures passed and going into law? guest: we have seen a ton of state activity in recent years. record numbers of laws. 20 week bans are very popular. arizona passed a ban recently,

which bans abortion at 20 weeks, which is a little bit earlier than the standard of the 20-24 week set in roe v wade. like north dakota, we have other states passing laws that require abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. depending on where you live, that can be hard to obtain. hospitals do not want to get into the middle of that, that sticky political fight, deciding whether abortion is obtainable in the state. mississippi had a law passed last year -- it is really getting challenged in court -- it is another state where there is just one abortion clinic left. if that clinic cannot get those admitting privileges, then they may have to shut down. another very popular law we have seen is to require abortions be provided in ambulatory surgical centers.

those have certain hallway requirements and requirements about sinks and closets. michigan passed along last year it like that. that is going to be very expensive for providers to conform to and therefore may put them out of business. host: we're talking about states' abortion laws. mark is our first caller, st. >> i wanted to. say i am noticing republicans are doing the double standard about bigger government and then they want to take away women's right to have control of their body and of the fetuses before them. i am getting really frustrated seeing these republicans changing everything that does not need to be changed. i mean, it is getting frustrating. how are republicans

looking at the issue of abortion? guest: at the federal level it is hard to enact these laws, so republicans have tried to stay away from talking too much about abortion because at the federal level we will not see a lot of action. president obama believes strongly in a woman having the right to an abortion if she wants one. comments about rape got republicans into trouble and those are related. we have seen the activity of the state level. what the caller spoke to was an argument put forward by pro-abortion rights groups that the government really shouldn't be in the business of telling a woman what to do when she is faced with a medical decision. on the other hand, of course, you have for public and saying we have an interest in protecting women, and interest in protecting the fetus, and

therefore they passed these laws based on those beliefs. host: virginia, republican caller. hi, rick. caller: it's greg. host: ok, hi, greg. caller: how are you doing this morning? thank you for giving me the pportunity to speak. i think this is so sad. it is just tearing away the rights of the most vulnerable in the most innocent for furthering a political agenda and keeping popular with the liberal democrats in a very self-righteous, selfish way that goes totally contrary to the bible. it is sad, and i see a president that fights so strong for the gun rights and using kids on the

stage as a ploy when there is thousands among thousands of innocent, vulnerable children being killed every year, and it is totally contrary to the bible, and i would like to say to ms. esme that in the end, not you, ma'am, and your constituents, but god will prevail -- host: esme is and have constituents. she is a journalist. is that advice you would give to those who support abortion rights? caller: that is absolutely a message i would give to all of them, yes, ma'am. host: ok, let's go to esme deprez for response. guest: you know, this issue divides america like a few others. the caller obviously spoke to believe that many people have. in north dakota, most recently when these bills were being

debated on the floors, there were lawmakers who cited scripture and they often cite their religious beliefs for wanting to protect the unborn child or the fetus, and therefore this is a source of the lyrical agreement and religion definitely plays into this issue. host: let's look at the gallup poll un-american opinions about abortion and roe v wade. would you like to see the supreme court overturn the 1973 oe v wade decision or not? 52% say no, 29% say yes, 18% have no opinion. the no opinion level is the highest level gallup has reported on this question dating back to 1989. ms. deprez, any thoughts on how public opinion has shifted or stay the same over the years?

guest: i think polls have showed that this is a very divisive issue, and you get into labels that really don't describe the full feelings of a lot of americans. you have the pro-choice label versus the pro-life label, when many people are in between and many people can see the arguments on both sides. i don't think that we are going to see resolution or strong majority opinions, any time on either side. host: james offers his opinion n twitter. into a nissan next caller in pasadena, maryland, on our independent line. caller: i think this was a good thing that passed in north dakota the cause, -- because like the lady mentioned, it could be taken up in the courts and the challenge.

my personal opinion is believing in life, the gritty, and the pursuit of happiness for all, including the unborn. i would like to see this challenge in court and hopefully get held up, because life is for all, particularly for the nborn. i feel that abortion in the case of convenience is just completely selfish. you are talking about the laws regarding the cases of rape and incest and all that. i understand that and such issues need to be handled and dealt with delicately. however, in the case of just abortion for the sake of convenience, i think it is just a little bit selfish and we need to consider the unborn in those matters. host: ok. esme deprez, our color talked

about wanting to see the courts take this issue up. guest: right, that is what we're seeing out of north dakota. when the governor signed this bill, he he was clear in his intentions that we don't know if the law is constitutional, referring to the six week heartbeat ban, but maybe we will find out. important to note that mainstream abortion groups are not pushing these six-week bands -- bans are it what roe v wade told us is that the woman has the right terminate her pregnancy until viability, which the previous twitterer reference, up to 24 weeks. a six-week ban goes beyond that. mainstream abortion groups don't see the ideological makeup of the court favorable to them right now, which is the reason why they don't typically push six-week bans because if a law

like this makes it to the supreme court, they don't think they have a favorable opinion to be handed down. it is really a tension we are seeing layout and the antiabortion movement, going to the supreme court and having roe challenged and those who want to wait a little bit until the ideological makeup is more favorable to them and just kind of chip away at the law until then. host: here is physguy on twitter. we saw a different perspective in "the washington post" this week. cecile richards did an interview ith sarah cliff. she says she sees a few reasons o worry.

"i think something will go to the supreme court rate i hope the court will honor judicial resident, the right women and men have had for 40 years, and won't let it be taken away. how are groups like time parenthood talking about what is happening in north dakota -- how are groups like planned parenthood talking about what is happening in north dakota? are they able to fund raise? guest: absolutely. you have the americans of both liberties union, -- american civil liberties union, groups that do pro bono work that are not affiliated with planned parenthood and do not have the lyrical muscle that planned parenthood does, and of course you have planned parenthood challenging these laws. some of them have said we are going to challenge these laws and we are ready to fight on behalf of the remaining clinic

there in fargo. they call these laws blatantly unconstitutional -- for example, with the six-week and, it contravenes the legal precedent set in roe v wade. they say they are dangerous and they don't let women make the decision and don't take into consideration the choices and factors that may weigh on that woman when she is making the decision. they are very mobilizing around these laws and getting prepared to fight them very hard. host: esme deprez is a reporter with bloomberg news. she joins us from new york city and she writes for both bloomberg and "business week." democrats line -- hi, joe. caller: happy friday, happy easter to everybody. i am a pro-lifer. we don't call ourselves antiabortionists. it is a pro-life movement.

i applaud north dakota and the overnor 40 is doing. i hope that they are successful n their endeavors to reverse these terrible laws that are killing our unborn children. and again, thank you, and happy good friday and happy easter to veryone. host: ms. deprez, any houghts? caller: i think his views are obviously shared by the lawmakers who passed these laws in north dakota and others who are passing similar laws in ther states. north dakota is a real possibility for becoming the first state with no abortion clinic. again, there is just one clinic in the state right now. it is in fargo. if that shuts down, it would be the first with no clinic, which would be a huge symbolic victory for antiabortion advocates. we will see what happens.

host: here are the states considering a heartbeat bill. kansas, kentucky, mississippi, ohio, wyoming. we see one tweet talking about his. guest: right, we did see that amendment get voted down in mississippi. the concern a lot of people race is that these written very vaguely. we don't totally know what would be the effect. in north dakota we saw a debate surrounding the personhood measure, that it may shut off some forms of contraception, may make it really hard for in vitro fertilization doctors to operate normally as they do now. the state medical association says this may complicate

end-of-life care, it may complicate organ donation. the personhood bills are really an unknown right now. we don't know what effect they would have. as far as the heartbeat dance, we see those being debated in five states right now. this is kind of the hottest bill right now in the abortion legislation. this debate is not over. we saw arkansas in march passed a 12-week ban. it was based on some of the same thoughts, of when the heartbeat can be protected. it is the question of how you detect the heartbeat. in six-week it is necessary to do a transvaginal ultrasound. in 12 weeks you can do in a typical abdominal ltrasound. host: here is a visual image of the states considering heartbeat bills.

north dakota just signed that into law. you can see the details about arkansas' law. this is from "the new york imes." let's go to our next caller. this one is in poland, maine. janet on our independent line. hi, janet. aller: good morning. i will say a bit of these sting -- some of these things with a bit of tongue-in-cheek. i grew up in the 40s and 50s, when modesty was something that was held in society. i remember the first time i saw men in washington talking about bortion. i was master think that men were talking about something so -- i was embarrassed to think that men were talking about something so personal to women. and i have a problem with the

term pro-life. if they tell me they are against the death penalty, i believe they are pro-life. i prefer pro-choice and anti-choice. i have a question for esme, and it is this -- i grew up catholic and i seem to remember that they said that life -- there was not a soul or whatever until so many weeks in a pregnancy. i don't know the answer to that, ut up until abortion became an issue -- and at that time, when we started talking about abortion in the 1960s, one of my friends said she thought that life began when you took your first breath. if god came down and told me when there was a soul or life began or what, i would believe it. here is another thing that drives me nuts, when they quote the bible, whether talking about same-sex marriage or abortion.

what happens when the muslim population overtakes the hristian population? does that mean we base all our decisions on the karen -- koran now? host: all right, janet, let's go to esme deprez on the issues you brought up. guest: this issue of when life begins is at the heart of a lot of these debates. a lot of lawmakers pushing the antiabortion bills will tell you that life begins at conception and therefore, whatever -- they based that reasoning sometimes on religious doctrine, sometimes on other things. obviously you have the opposing side saying that life begins when you take your first breath or life begins when a fetus is viable outside the womb. it is such a hotbed for political disagreement, and it depends on your personal views

about when it begins. we are seeing the laws being formed around those beliefs about when life does begin. host: here are comments on acebook. we will keep sharing your thoughts and opinions on twitter. @cspanwj. we will share those tweets on the air. high, elise -- hi, elise. caller: my problem with this subject -- look at paul ryan's abortion bill your so much about unborn children, and yet when these children are born, they want nothing to do with them. they want to take away food and housing. 30 times now congress voted down

the health care bill. they are so self-righteous that they are going to tell women how they should live their lives. i'm really tired of males, males, males, and that goes for christian right, the vatican, and republican men. i am astounded at the republican women that put up with this. i sometimes wonder what goes on in their brains. host: tell us about what is happening in the -- in wisconsin, what the conversation is like concerning abortion. caller: we used to be a big blue state. now it has turned red, parts are purple. we have a governor, scott walker, he is trying to take away everything. he is taking white unions, trying to take away early voting -- he is taking away unions, trying to take away early voting, anything that would benefit democrats.

it is the same as every republican governor. and the vaginal ultrasound, that is absolutely sickening. it makes me wonder what is with these men to come up with such hings. host: esme deprez, what is happening with these purple tates? guest: we have a six states with republican control in both chambers of the legislature. those are the states we look to typically to see if bills are going to sail through much easier, obviously, when you have one party in control. in the so-called purple states, you have political disagreements so it is not as clear that they will be passing legislation related to abortion. and it is interesting to note that very few states are trying to actually expand abortion rights, which is the other side f this argument. we have governor cuomo here in

new york trying to liberalize a bit the abortion laws. currently the law says it can riminalize doctors who perform abortions after 24 weeks if the health of the mother is in question and not just simply the life of the mother. he is trying to get the health aspect of that codified into law so doctors may not be as afraid as he thinks they may be now to perform abortion at later stages in the pregnancy. but new york is really an anomaly in this. most states are trying to restrict the procedure as opposed to expand access or make it easier for a woman to get. host: crystal river, florida. emily is a republican. good morning, emily. caller: good morning. first i want to comment on the previous color, mentioned she feels the vaginal ultrasounds are disgusting.

i have had three very high risk pregnancies, and i had to have vaginal ultrasounds to see if the pregnancy is viable. so i disagree with that area -- i disagree with that, and i was ot uncomfortable at all. a lot of the -- i don't want to say women, but the young girls, are the ones getting abortions. they, first of all, are not old enough or mature enough to even have sex, and they don't have the mental capacity to choose that in life. they say it is going to ruin their life. i got pregnant when i was 16, and i got pregnant with twins. unfortunately, i had a basketball scholarship and i gave up everything.

unfortunately i went into premature labor and they both died after birth. 10 years later -- i couldn't have children afterwards, but 10 years later i was able to get pregnant and that is why all my pregnancies were high risk. but i am not for abortion. roe v wade was based on a lie. the woman said she was raped, when she later came out and said he wasn't. that was based on a lie, and that is what started the whole abortion rights. and i feel that if america was, say, or 80% of america wasn't for abortion, that our congress, our political, our politics wouldn't be for abortion. i think it is all about getting votes.

you go with the higher opinions of the united states -- host: all right, let's get a esponse. guest: the caller brings up a number of interesting points. we have certainly seen this vaginal ultrasound debate, and you sharp focus in recent years -- this vaginal ultrasound debate come into sharp focus in recent years, whether the governor needs to mandate a vaginal ultrasound versus in a domino ultrasound. that has political heat around it. you bring up the fact that girls are having sex at age's that are not mature enough to have sex or have the mental capacity to have sex. i think the opposing argument would simply be that if a girl does not have the mental capacity to have sex the mental capacity to be a mother? there is obviously -- if a girl does not have the mental capacity to have sex, doesn't she have the mental capacity to

be a mother? there is obviously disagreeing arguments on both sides. the color's opposition to abortion, we are seeing that play out in many states and a lot of people filled the family. -- feel differently. let's look at the history of abortion law in this country since the caller brought up roe wade. i'm a 1962 to 1973, before roe v wade, 17 states amended their laws to allow abortion in cases such as rape, health risks and etal damage. only pennsylvania failed to lift a total ban on the procedure. then we sought roe v wade in 1972 -- then we saw roe v wade in 1973. the justices ruled that the u.s.

constitution guarantees women a right to privacy in deciding whether to end pregnancy. he states longer can prohibit abortion -- states can no longer prohibit abortion except in cases of viability. even then, states must allow abortions when necessary to save a woman's life or protect her health. ow have we seen the law worked on by states since that jacko u.s. out -- how have we seen the law worked on by states since then? how is roe v wade effective right now compared to what tates are doing? guest: there were two very landmark cases at the high court related to abortion. obviously roe v wade was the first. and we saw in 1992 a case called land parenthood -- planned parenthood v. casey, and what the high court decided in 1992

is that states have the right to restrict -- to pass certain restrictions, and certain restrictions are legal. what the court said is that the state cannot impose an undue burden or great obstacle to a woman trying to get an abortion. that is exactly what we are seeing states try -- kind of test. we are seeing states test what the undue burden limit really means, and how far states can go in legislating the procedure. host: and i am sharing with you these images and this timeline from pewforum.org. there are details about planned parenthood v. casey. kate in iowa on our democrats line. hi, kate. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i would like to share as a democrat, as a young female, i

was pro-abortion, and now as a woman, wife, and and as a mother, i am against abortion. i do not think i have the right to impose my will on someone. saying that, i think one of the fundamental things that is being forgotten in this discussion is mentioning the woman that was behind roe v wade and how she has, since having had that abortion, changed her opinion to becoming pro-life. i do not think any female, as your review scholars stated, -- as your previous college stated, has the ability to know the medical or emotional or spiritual ramifications, regardless of her religion, has on her body or mentality or any other part of the rest of her life. that choice, which our society has basically taken down to

nothing -- it is an interesting point to make because as we have segued from listening to the obama's decision on gun control to this life decision and how we are protecting children in one aspect, what about protecting babies from the scissors used during partial-birth abortions or any other procedures? a lot of people don't want to think about those things, but if you ever do research on it and look into the subject and take it from a human perspective, putting people as i am a human being and we have inalienable rights, people can understand or maybe get more in-depth understanding of what is actually transpiring when they make these life altering decisions. host: ok, thank you, kate, for sharing your perspective. let's get a response from esme deprez.

guest: i think the caller's political -- personal evolution shows one is been happening over the past few years. lawmakers are acting on their beliefs against abortion and we are seeing more laws passed at the state level regarding this. one thing i thought was really interesting in north dakota, a lot of these laws do not have exceptions for rape or incest. a number of years ago you could be -- many pro-life republicans would say "i am against abortion except when a woman has been raped or victim of incest or life or health of the mother is at risk. now we are seeing a loss to further and do not provide any exceptions. -- laws that go further and do ot provide any exceptions. it ties closely to what the caller was describing about her wn evolution on the topic. host: we are showing again from "bloomberg businessweek" where there are abortion clinics and

facilities in the area. fargo, surrounding states, and canada. mike, republican caller. caller: i have a question for your guest and perhaps she could clear it up for me. in relation to this law they are talking about in north dakota, i was under the understanding that you had to be at least six weeks pregnant just in order to have an abortion, and so therefore you cannot have one prior to six weeks and you cannot have fun after six weeks, then you cannot have 1 -- you cannot have one after six weeks, then you cannot have one. that was my question. guest: i think the caller raises a great point. a lot of women do not know if they are pregnant at six weeks. that is why the sole remaining clinic in the state is saying that we are going to be shut down, we are going to be put out of business if this law gets held up. effectively there will be no

effectively there will be no market for lack of a better term for the procedure. most women do not know they are pregnant at six weeks, and a lot of them do, but you don't necessarily act the next day. it might take some time for a woman to way her decision and decide what she wants to do between the time she finds out she is pregnant and by the time she may decide to go through with an abortion. a six-week ban -- the caller is right, it would be a near ban on all abortions in practice. host: here is what esme deprez wrote in bloomberg. "at six weeks, the fetus is typically smaller in size than a dime, according to the mayo clinic." she was jane roe in roe v wade. "vanity fair" profiled earlier this year.

hi, andrew. caller: people bring up a lot of the typical points, and it is important -- we are talking about life issues here. it is very important that we not only talk about life experiences, but we just have to agree on objective criteria. i think the bottom line is this -- ethically, if there is any doubt -- we have all of these arguments about when life begins. if there is any doubt, shouldn't we resist the urge to perform these abortions? i know these are people in crisis, but people in crisis don't make good decisions. that is why it takes all of us to look at each other in the face and say let's rally around here to do something better than this. your democratic caller who called earlier about republicans and pro-life and do not want to provide social services for these people -- well, that is a good starting

point, because that is about dignity.g human but if we are going to protect human thing today, that humans have inalienable unity him and every human being is unique, we have to start from the beginning, or society begins to fall apart from these mixed messages. host: andrew, we will leave it there and go to esme deprez for final thoughts. guest: i would just say to the caller that right, the point at when life begins is a major flash point in the discussion. it is hard to say that medically or ethically or religiously when life begins. we all have different opinions on that. he mentioned the question about when we should take care of life before a person is born or after. this comes down to economics in the state of north dakota as well. it raises an interesting

question -- there is going to be a big legal fight in north dakota and all of the states challenging abortion laws. the state in north dakota, for example, is ready to spend that money to defend this case and bring it all the way up to the supreme court. obviously, the opponents on the other side would say, let's spend that money elsewhere, let's spend the funds to litigate this case and spend it on the children who were already born and don't have enough food to eat at home. it is an ongoing political debate and we are seeing it play out in north dakota and all over the country right now. host: esme deprez, a reporter for bloomberg news. you can see her stories at bloomberg's website, bloomberg.com. thanks for talking with us this morning. guest: thanks for having me. >> tomorrow how consumers have reacted to the payroll tax

resuming to a higher level. history andthe mission of the u.s. secret service. and the appointment as the new secret service director. also, a reporter on how the glock ction of the has influenced the debate about guns. participants that include officials from the government and commentators. span2, randall robinson. c-span3, a look at u.s. naval history. tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the c-span networks.

night, anna harrison, , and juliaer tyler. of firstis the madonna ladies. she posed as a model when that was frowned upon. she was known as the rows of long island. on all accounts, she was bewitching. she bewitched john tyler. she loved being first lady. she had the job for less than a year, but it was julia tyler to ordered the marine band to play

"hail to the chief." she was raised on a platform with purple blooms in her hair, to theshe receded queenly role that mar the washington had rejected. >> your questions and comments about these first lady's monday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span and c-span3, also on c-span radio and c-span.org. next, remarks from seymour andh, spoke to journalists students at indiana university. this is an hour and a half. >> thank you.

investigative journalists are described as custodians of conscience. investigating reporting, the craft of revealing hidden truth is thought to be the highest form of journalism. in the practice there are few more prominent figures dan seymour hersh. 1959.rted in his subsequent career of its checking things out when to important expos days, exposing civilians in amelia massacre -- i massacre.a these revelations won him a pulitzer prize, and there have been numerous national awards

recognitions cents. those journalists who have dabbled in investigative andrting that challenge official emeritus and make mincemeat out of sacred cows know the work invites criticism, and he has received some. 1 and joab came from a former defense official who called him the closest thing america has to a terrorist. the knicks this administration snoop through his tax forms. spying -- ic kept reporting. one thing that makes that notable is some of the best work has been done as an independent journalist, not backed by resources. he was called a snoop artist. a recent history describe him as a new reporter known for his

brains. indiana university school of journalism is divided -- is delighted to welcome mr. seymour hersh. >> you will not be laughing or smiling when i am done. i will talk about chasing a story and do a narrative. i will try to make get interactive. bit aboutk a little that oxymoron, journalistic ethics. [laughter] world going to help the day as it was 10 years ago. we're not out of the woods yet muslim --ni-shia

we can talk about that and i will answer your questions. bitll tell you a little about journalism, the back to shotry.ai i know you want to get your party's later tonight. l there tonight. what we will do is i will put you back in 1969. a free-lance kid. i started at city news, and i felt law school. i did not like it. toent there, i had gone college there, and i bumped around and got a job as a reporter for the city news reporter, which covered crime because there was so much in chicago, but i worked with other

guys so i got a taste of some of the good journalists around. they did the army stuff, which is boring, and it was before any board and you played a toy soldier. it was ok, and i went back and and covering the legislature in south dakota -- that was ok. you learn something about cynicism because i spent a lot bes, me with the souix tri because nobody was writing about them. george mcgovern, a decent guy, he wrote a lot of stories about then, and you never know where stories will bowsprit that got me to the associated press which got me to washington, covering

the vietnam war. on the job training for learn why to heed a war, because going there, working in washington, and as a correspondent, and the ap has juice because every story you write is on every editor's desk. the other thing was you get to know military guys. although ig earlier am critical of my government, i am a held about stuff, one thing that you find in the cia, all these agencies, in the military, what makes the world work is you find people that you are not loyal to them two-start

or the chief of staff or the army, but you are loyal to the constitution, and that is drifting away more particularly as you see the erosion of congress in its oversight capacity, the growth of the executive. there are still people deep inside, so as a young reporter covering and having lunch with officers who have been to vietnam, i would learn about what was going on that everybody killed was counted as an enemy. the body count, some of you know about it. if you are young and you do not know about it, that is the gate. i remember growing up in chicago in the 1940's, and world flanders field and fields of poppies. it was not impossible for students now to worry about a war. the thing that ought to be

worrying about that war that we fought a war in a country about which we knew very little. i am talking at the top, the civilian top, in the white house. we did not know the history, culture, society. potential commie adversaries. the things that was so horrifying to me as i got into the my lai story was our soldiers would go unprepared for the primitive society, but it had been a society for two dozen years. if you ever moved -- we were relocating people at some point. they were bad lands, areas controlled by the communists, and he wanted to relocate balances. we built little hamlets in safe places and try to relocate

people who had been on the same place for 2000 years. one of the things that happen is a woman -- mothers always crossed a threshold first before the children. that is a cultural thing. our boys would come in and gather the people up and we are going to relocate a village. we had 10 choppers and fly them out. the mothers would insist, and american boys, we put the kids on the plane first. the mothers would fight like hell to be there first, and the kids with the how horrible these mothers bwere. it is amazing stuff. is importantg that about the war now is that we end up a couple decades later going into another culture in iraq about which we know very little, and then we go into afghanistan and now the french have gone

into mali. that will not end well. me,s always amazing to breathtaking how we can just stagger from one colossal destructive mechanism to another. in some way, being america and a lot of good things -- anyway, so came tod for the ap, solutions. i got edgy in my reporting. was negative about my reporting. my attitude was toward the truth. i was pushed out, reassigned to an education beach, and i resigned and went to work for eugene mccarthy, who was running against johnson. benedictine,a brilliant philosopher type from

minnesota. there were a lot of things he did not know much about. he played hockey in college, and baseball, and an amazing the bright guy who would talk about the vietnam war as immoral. what? a politician making the notion that something is in moral that we do? is iraq immoral? it was breathtaking to see the hopeful period. i moved on from that. politics is awful. it is, just awful. that axelrod is joining nbc and robert gibbs is joining nbc, and we know that george stephanopoulos is now at abc. it is amazing -- and you wonder

what the press does not really get going. my attitude toward cable television and all these reporters going on cable television is simple. if you took away all these guys, , none ofse, i think them could say anything, because none of them know very much. 1968,m there in freelancing. mccarthy, i do four or five months there. i am freelancing in '69. nixon is in. nixon campaigned on that great campaign slogan, had a plan to end the war. it turned out that his plan was to win it, but we did not know that. so i m minding my business. i had done a book, chemical and biological warfare, but i was married, had a kid, and if i

made $8,000 in 1969 it was a block. my wife was a social worker. 4 gallons of gasoline for a buck. also heating oil was 18 cents. you could live. in late 1969 i got a contract from random house to do something on pentagon waste. i am doing it. it is money in the bank. i get a call one day. it was from somebody who ended up -- he became an educator who became head of the voice of america for bill clinton. he was chairman of the department of journalism at southern california. at that time he was an anti-war lawyer. somehow he has picked up -- he will not tell me -- he said, there is an amazing story going

on. some guy, some gi has shot up by a lot of people, it is a huge scandal and the pentagon is trying to suppress it. i could not -- he would not tell me who told him. i only knew him through his brother, i did not know him, but -- d read all of these advice i give to journalists is simple, read before you write. i had read the various books published by the american friends committee and the anti- poor people who would come back from vietnam's. there were worked hearings in 1968 to talk about atrocities they witnessed. i read that stuff and paid attention to its. i also knew from talking to the young generals i met at the pentagon, you meet young generals and we talk about the redskins and you get to learn

that basically a lot of them thought they were in the business of mass murderer. absolutely, the good ones. i knew there was something to this story, and i started working it. probably because i was bored with my book. what do you do? you are confronted with the rumor. the first thing i did is -- because i spent time at the pentagon -- we keep very good records of any criminal activity. that it was he was being prosecuted. i went to the legal office of the pentagon and and into the bowels of the procedure, and i started reading the files, looking for a murder indictment or investigation. i found nothing that met that criteria. there were the usual rate at here and murdered there. nothing that smacked of anything improper that was grotesque.

instinct, and you do it, and i will tell this story a good way and a bad way. to be oru journalists maybe not to be -- if you think about it -- where are the jobs? you will find something. [laughter] there is always the seven-11. a tough business right now. mind you, i do not have a lot of economic worries. he did not have that much money, you could -- we rented a little house for 200 bucks. you could do not -- you could not do that today in washington. i kept on poking, and i did not go anywhere, and for a couple weeks and 10 days later or so, i read newspapers, went back. most of the major things you learn about if you go back and read the papers they are there, but you just did not see it

because you do not know the context. that is what is so fascinating about being a journalist, that you can see what is there. if you readmy lai, that the trust account, there were so many accounts, they had a war crimes tribunal that nobody paid attention to. if you read that you would see the my lai story 50 times. was a day in march of 1968, a group of american boys, in a subliminal -- a unit made up people largely who were accepted, the standards had been lowered by robert mcnamara because it essentially he wanted to get us he lowered the standards to bring more, if you will, hispanics, rural americans

as a kid from indiana who told me played a big role, under glass, african-americans, he wanted to change the color of the corpses, get rid of a white corpses and get a little more color in the mix because that would help the public relations. he lowered the standards and these kids are packed into a unit. most of them did not have a high school equivalent. they did not know much. march 16, they went into a village and they were told the night before that they were going to meet the enemy for the first time. they had been in the country for about 12 weeks and had lost to get an occasional bullets. they were falling into booby traps. wounded thatody way. we called them viet cong. what i call them vietnamese

nationalists. in any case, they had lost enough, and they had gone brutalized in the 12 weeks. refrigeratorsve and i do not know how to cross a threshold, which made them convinced that they were dealing with some humans, which is the way you get people to kill people in a war. you have to dehumanize them. the big memory was kill, kill, think, think.ink, they were told they were going to meet the bad boys for the first time. they did what kids did in that more than. the officers and enlisted men drank, and the enlisted men and took to get up, and they got stone pit 5:00, 4:00 in the morning came, they took their weapons, and they got on choppers to go kill for america. they did do that.

they found nothing but women and children and old men appeared for some reason, they pulled together, put them in ditches, and executed them slowly, killing them randomly with bullet after bullet point they raped women before they would kill them. by senior seen officers and covered up. later.ude 535 bodies they came back to the village a few weeks letter and buried the bodies properly. day.is a pretty bad i am into the store, and i grew up world war ii. the movies i saw, john wayne, van johnson, which fly out around in their place, and i remember the movies about the nips would start with the night before, the american officers were in a bar, chasing some

nurse, and there is a fight, and a guy's got into a terrible fight, van johnson and errol flynn got into a terrible fight. the next morning they were nips, together, and the there was an air battle, and the nips would fly with the kennedy closed. they would wear the leather caps that you would tie under your chins. squinty glasses and buck teeth. flynn and johnson's the law he runs to his resting at the last minute, and he pores allow a bullets into the japanese plane. the bullets would come in and you see the plane go like this -- it was pretty crude stuff. i remember as if i was watching

xviii."ars it started going down. that would be the noise. before it hit the water, a trickle of blood would come out of the corner of the nip's mouth, and he would go cheering like mad. there was a book written about the censorship of war war ii, whose knew marines, fathers were at iwo jima and tara tara. the marines would just pile in, never saw it. we never got a sense of how bad it was and how stupid some of the operations were in terms of everything going wrong. that is another story. that is always wore. a digression.

checking, and i covered the building and there was a guy, and one of the guys had gone to vietnam, a colonel, and in vietnam he caught a bullet. bump into him and a halt. this is a week or so after i got the tip. i do not want to start asking too many questions, because if it is a real i do not want -- and nobody should know what i am looking at. there was nobody to tell. my wife, what did she care? she probably did, but she had her own problems. [laughter] being marriedough to a guy who did my lai. ladies put up with a lot. it is probably true, but i just said. this guy had been one of the

guys i clowned around with, and we all have fun in america. people like us and we are likable. i was having a good time with this guy, and i see him in the hall, and he is linthicum and i know he had been frocked. that is what they call it in the army. i jumped on him and i grabbed him and say, look at you, shot in the knee, you gotta start. i give him a real hard time did i say, so what are you doing now? he came back early because he was wounded badly. he lost part of his leg, he said i'm working for the chief of staff for westy. i said, no kidding? what about this guy who shot up everybody? you mean, calley? --said,

[sigh] he said not worth worrying about. ok, here we get to journalism ethics three i six m zero, man, you just deliver the package. i now have a name, an idea that it was the chief of staff's office, and that everybody is saying when you say that that is that way of dismissing it in a way, but he is working with the chief. that gives you a point of view that they are aware, they are not anxious for this to get out. did i say to him, general, you just made a mistake, because you put me in the store -- hello, no. judd i have? no.nalistically, and i go to the library and i do different spellings. goddamn, late 1968,

there's a first lieutenant named william calley jr. who was held on killing an unspecified number of civilians. that is all. jackson in south carolina. have got something. there's something there, so i call up best the public affairs office at fort jackson and i say, i said, major, what do you got on this guy calley? he said, we know about that. he shot up a bar. he was not lying. that was what he was told. i know i have something. point, i go back to my

car original source, who clearly knew more, and i say, ok, it is william calley jr. who is his lawyer? i cannot find any records. "thee was also a story in new york times," paragraph. he had been a kid that was -- that went to junior college, went to work in one of the southern air roads and was fired after three weeks because he forgot to throw a switch and two freight trains collided. the 90-day wonders they were running out to run troops. anybody has read the novel about the imam, the content many of the soldiers had about their junior officers. tim -- his name?

who of my talking about? he is amazing. he is described killing ificers in a novel form -- mean, as a fictional short story in a collection he did. one of the things i learned thingsmy lai after i did japan,ry, doctors in american doctors, i mentioned this earlier, they began writing me in care of wherever, i do not know how i got these letters i anti-war this for a dispatch. japandoctors, surgeons in were treating nothing more than first and second the tenets --

lieutenants with bullet holes in the back. you're not going to smoke it up or took it up, and they wanted to work harder and going on patrol, they would get it. there was a lot more that went on. name,comes back with a latimer, george latimer, who turned out to be lawyer. i went back and found him. i found latimer had been a judge on the court of military appeals. i spend as he lived in salt lake city, and i spent the day in the library reading a bunch of his cases, and the courts of appeals, it is complicated because you did not ever have bodies, an allegation that somebody kills somebody and he is guilty of murder, and when it comes to the appeals section, judges like latimer would say we did not know what happened because we did not have witnesses or bodies and just

anecdotal stuff. he was reversing an lot of decisions. he felt he had the choice. there were a lot of disheartening decisions. i called him up and i say,- her sh, what to talk to you about the calley matter. i am coming to the west coast next week and i am going to salt lake. you might if i come to see you? he said, no come see me. i did not want to be -- i wanted to go see him but i did not want him to think i was making a big deal. that was a reality. be do not always have to wonderfully up front with everybody. it is called line or misrepresented which may not always be part of the investigative reporting game, but there is always -- let me

say this, something i said at dinner -- i speak too much -- in 50 years of being an report, i have not only done political crimes, war crimes, organized crime, the mysterious threats i ever had came from noriega, as a murderer, and i did all these stories in 50 years of writing about nasty things and i have never met anybody who ever thought he did anything wrong. you've got to remember this. that is not where we are usually act. that always makes it more complicated. i am sure this poor guy in new jersey that "the new york times" -- any way, not that i feel sorry for him. a lot of this that goes on in congress and probably everywhere.

so at this point, i like to see him the next day care is a partner in a law firm, a mormon, and elder or deacon. maybe deacon is the right word, is it? a big boss. i go see him, and he is a very let's talkd i say, about your decision in such and such and we go over some of his cases. -- at the chicago law school, and he thinks i am the nicest guy in the world. why he decided what he decided. he is making the case and telling me about the difficulty. he was on the court for about 15 years after being a jag, and then retires and goes into a practice. thinks i am the

nicest man that he has ever run into. so then i say, let's talk about calley, and he says this is a real mess. i cannot believe what the army is doing to this guy. he goes into his desk and he is prepared and pulls out one of cardboardlla folders, folders, and he opens it up and there's a series of documents, and we talk for a minute and then he says, excuse me, he gets one of those-- partner calls, when they're discussing fees -- and i remember him the same tone of voice, and why am i talking about money? he is having this conversation and then he hangs up and says, look, i have to go to one of my associates and he leaves. ok --

[laughter] what do you do? c'moome on. what do you do? what do you do, students? you go what? you do what? why? [indiscernible] what? but how do i rationalize that? why do i think it is ok? does anybody have an idea? what made you think it is ok? he did not put it in his desk, did he? what do you think? somebody has to talk. [laughter] loud. what? [indiscernible]

you know what is interesting about that, she says he obviously left it there because he wanted you to see it. there was a great oriental rug there, and suppose i roll up that run and throw out the window, and would that work? [laughter] a couple of artifacts from the various wars he did, from ashtrays and stuff like that pit, on. keep going. that is easy, he wanted me to do it, right? anybody think i should not do it? .o grownups, no lawyers about students? anybody think i would be crazy enough to do it? ? if i was working for the "the sun-times," and i did

eot do it, he would say, com back, you're done. desk,ok if it is on his right? anybody bothered by that? who? >> me. >> you are too old. you got to be young. there is no right or wrong. there is only were wrong. [laughter] it.let's go back to the phone call rings. he is pain to people cuts down puts down the folder, into his desk, and leaves. what, students? let me give you what was going through my mind if you think this is going to really hurt the

war issue, i am thinking that fortune, andfame, court. i think this is about me, a great story. he puts it into his desk drawer. what would you, guys? [indiscernible] who says that? how old are you? students? oh come on, your calendar suppose he had taken that folder and instead of putting it in the desk he had walked to a file cabinet, open that cannot put it in, but left the drawer open. suppose he closed the door but left it locked. -- left unlocked? is there a difference? what?

[indiscernible] in plain sight. is that a movie that somebody saw? [laughter] if we only dealt with what was in plain sight, we would not get very much in our business. what do you do? ,he big jump, and i'm 30, 31 into the major leagues right there. ok, so -- >> [indiscernible] you're too old to say that. that was 1969. we're talking 40-some odd years later. the morality i had then was not what i have now. i thought there was a war to stop, we had to stop the war. come on, where do you draw the line? if he thought it is ok to get to the top of the deaths, like you think it is ok to get inside the

desk? what is the difference? >> [indiscernible] >> what? if you were rolling the rug up. if you could do it quick. >> [indiscernible] >> what? >> [indiscernible] >> not because i wanted it? are you going to make this virtuous? [laughter] a virtue? look, it turns out you cannot do any of those. as first out calley amendment rights. the first amendment, but all the a ministry, i have the right to go into a creek that does not mean i did. i can tell you what happened. if this was a smaller

classroom, i have done this and i like to do it in journalism school, sometimes even in graduate schools, because it seems the older, more lessons you learned in journalism the more committed you are to let's go for it, man. you would be amazed in graduate schools, 90% say do it quick. bring your camera. we did not have tape recorders. i could have read the file. did have a that he phone call, and there was a few minutes where we were not chatting, and he had opened up the front page, and i read it upside down. you cannot remember if you are a young kid, parents remember when kids are young and it did not matter which way it was up. if you were babysitters you know

that. it is harder when you are older, but i sat there and read it and the first sentence read, it was classified, an army charge jr. iswilliam calley of the murderilty of 109 human beings. 10 whites equal one oriental. how you figure out what an oriental is worth? not as much as a white or african or hispanic american. then id enough of it and had this insane conversation. i never asked him for it. he would not give it to me. i was a man of all. the only thing i asked when i left was, and i was very nice, and he was very nice, he did not realize i was not taking notes, but i was copying it.

how would you describe that in terms of honorable behavior? probably necessary, but this is little business you are getting into as reporters. i talk to the young lady who presaged by introduction, whenever her name is -- [laughter] if the campus newspapers start doing investigations, they are headed for the obvious place to investigate, athletics, money, it gets in, and before long they are all gone to be kicked out of school. every professor will lose tenure. anyway, because if you start doing stuff at a major university in sports, which is the only real story to do, -- i saidnt is happen is this proceeding took place at

fort jackson. i said, is he at fort jackson? he said, i cannot say anything. i said, your honor, i am going to for jackson's i appeared on you have to say i am wasting my time. he said nothing. that was something. i went off to fort jackson and i story about, a long begin. i will take a minute and tell you. being in the army, i thought that calley is not in the phone book. he is not there, and the phone books change, and first i went to every prison. their five prisons in every cell. i went -- i do not know what they call them -- they had a different word for that. i went to the regional little jails and i put on my little crappie suit and a tie and i walked in and looked like a

lawyer and i carried a briefcase, and i said, i want bill calley out here now. they said, who? and i went all the clubs, every sports club, the hockey -- in the sports club, every place that was swimming. i went to the garages. i ask, had he ever serviced a owned by calley? rented a car in south carolina, the fort is, and contiguous with the city, i was starving and i went to a p.x. got a hammer, and then i remembered something. this is september, and what i remember in the lawyer's office, he had been charged in

august, the previous august or july. a version of a grand jury called an artery to -- article 32 proceeding. we're looking at a big story and i have seen the document, marked secret. from nine days of the pentagon that the military in its efficiency changes phone books every three months. calley arrived in may and was not charged until late july. when he arrived in may and registered, coming back from vietnam, he came back as a first lieutenant. not in the -- he was book published in june, but maybe he would be listed in the new listings for the earlier book published in april. i call up the operator and this is the days were for homogenized

of voices. you can still get some southern accents in savannah. bigwe are mel the , one anglo-saxon,. so i get this operator and i say, i want you to do me a favor, it the old phone book, the april phone book and i want the last new listings. said, she checked with her boss and came back, she said, ok, i have got it. i'm looking for calley. she said, i got him. she said he came in the last week before we published the new director. then she hung up and was in this deep southern accent, and i remember the frustration. i found her, he was assigned to construction unit come up engineer battalion, infantryman.

i had been looking at him all over, but i could not find him. i went to the unit, and i called back, another operator read it to me, it was in another camp, and i went 20 miles away and now it is about 3:00 in the afternoon, one of these modern army buildings, three-story by aing on -- separated one-story passageway, where the commander had his office. there were three rows of barracks. i go into a side door, and i figure, i got him, he is here. i go up and down one side, and all the beds are made pitifully like we used to make them. we were good at making beds. we all had to be. then i had to go down and in order to get to the other side, had to go down to a passageway, and it was one of those stores

where there was a bottom and a front top that was open, so i crawled underneath. sure enough, on the second floor, on the other side, we're talking about is making your lock. that is what it is about. wasas irrational what i doing. i was just doing it, chasing everything. on the third floor, it was empty. 315 in thefloor, -- day. i got him, it is calley. on thebig whack bunk. has a 16-letter last think i said, it is not calley. said, will you explain to me what your sleeping here at 3 caught 30? he was from iowa, and this is

now october of 1969, a year and half after the incident. most of the soldiers were backed by then pick he said to me, i'm supposed to get out for the harvest. we got everything going. farming area. he tells me this sad story about how they lost his records and he is being held overcome although he did the his year in nam. i said, what is your job? i said, i am a male corporate >> i said, are you the mail clerk for the battalion? [laughter] hear about you ever a guy named calley? he said, that guy who shot up everybody?

said, he never was there, but i got his mail, and i would say that for a week and then i would drive over to seat smithy over the battalion. this is the italian headquarters. was the head quarters. the next higher level. so you deliver to smitty? my job was giving the mail to smitty. i said, where his headquarters? he said, far away. i said, when time is it? three caught 42. in 8 minutes, i said, i will pull up in a ford on the other side in a car. you come out exactly in eight minutes and take me over there. yeah, sure. he wanted action.

door.go out the side he is right there, we jumped in, he drives me to the headquarters about 15 minutes away. in modern american kid. at least i knew the route. i drove back and it is one of these beautiful days in georgia, and a battalion headquarters is a wooden ailding, and there is sergeant leaning against the door, the open door, and andquito season was over, the other thing he told me driving over, smitty been busted the week before. he was madder than hell. he was drinking pa. figure i've got to play the for tank and and i say, sergeant, i want smitty out here now. he said, what has he done now?

i said, get in the car. i am looking for calley. ed, i don't -- he lives off base somewhere. i said, what do you have on him? he said, have his personnel file. i said, get it. [laughter] and he said, ok. those in, takes it, puts it in the page the first page i see in the judge's office the day before, the charge sheet. it is all about making your lot. i found calley, got a strange story from him. he led me to the captain in charge from and i wrote the first of five stores as a freelancer. once i found calley, it took me a week or two to find somebody

to buy it. i was doingbefore -- another piece for life xing, so i had been making it. i was getting traction. the press secretary in which i met, became friendly with, walter cronkite, man tennis. my son used to think he was a watchmaker because of his white hair. i met all these guys, nobody would touch the sort. i had to sell it as an independent journalist, which is amazing, but it happened. that is the virtue of the press. one day, 40 newspapers got the store. the editors took it and about 35 of them made it the lead story. "the new philadelphia, york post," and then the week

andr, "the new york times" to the store. i found this poor kid that killed everybody in indiana. that is the famous line. once i found kids and the company, there was a lot of repressed memory. once you find one, you can find others, mostly in the west coast. some talked. some talk and i found a company rosser and then they tell me about paul is the kid who had been doing all the shooting. he'd done most of the -- a 30-bullet clip after a 30-bullet clip into a ditch, women and children. and there was this horrific moment that -- this is a repressed memory, finally somebody told me about it, i went back to others. he had been killing -- they put the 500 or so people into three ditches and they just shot into the ditches.

and m-1, if you hold the trigger down it becomes a semi-automatic. you don't have to pull it. i remember that from the army days. he shot six or seven clips. most of the african-american not our o way, this is war. we're not doing. this some of the hispanics shot but they shot high. nobody wanted to call out the farm boys who did it. the white boys who did this. nobody wanted to call them out because they were afraid they'd be hit later. that's the way it was. when people did bad things they didn't want anybody to talk about it. and the next day, some of the minority groups wore black arm bands. officers made them take it off. i wrote a second book about the coverup that nobody cared about but that's the way it goes, it was about how all the offices -- officers knew everything right away but covered it up. so it was then -- when i talked to my friend a year later, he was chief of staff i guess because he was so successful at killing innocent people, it

gets you promoted. i don't know. anyway, the point of all of this is that milo did all that shooting and at a certain moment they were eating their lunch, k.p. rations, next to the ditch, there's photographs of it, famous photographs, you've seen some of the photographs of the ditches. an army photographer started seeing what happened and he shot for the army, shot black and white, but then he shot a whole bunch of pictures of his own personal camera that he later sold for at least $100,000 to life d magazine after i did the stories because he had amazing photographs. but he didn't tell the army about those photographs. the ones he shot in black and white had nothing to do with what really happened. i'm talking about visual evidence. anyway, after -- while they were shooting they heard a keening noise. and it turns out one of the mothers, as mothers will do, tucked a baby, a 2-year-old, 3-year-old boy under her stomach and he survived the slaughter. they were shooting and shooting in the ditch and he was crawling his way up screaming

more and more as he got to the top. when he got up, he was all full of blood. and he began to run. across the rice paddies or the field. and lieutenant kelly who had ordered the killing, infamous lieutenant kelly, still lives in columbia, south carolina, lieutenant kelly said to paul who had been the most acquiescent of all the soldiers, some turned away after a little bit, but milo, 16 years old then, kept on firing. and kelly said to him, plug him. and milo couldn't do it. it's like seeing one, you know, it's likewise you can drop bombs from up high but you can't do go low and kill people. there's sort that have great philosophical, what you will, issue. of what's acceptable. and milo wouldn't do it. he drew the line. so the officers had a smaller rifle. kelly, everybody remembered, ran up behind the kid and shot him in the back of the head. sort of triumphly.

milo the next day stepped on a land mine and blew up his leg to the knee. and while they were ready to met vack him he was chanting, god has punished me and god will punish you. and the kid -- once one told me about it, everybody remembered, it was this chilling oath this curse. and they were saying, get him out of here, get him out of here. they got him out of there. a year and a half i'm looking for him. i find him, i'm in salt lake city on a pay phone calling 100 different -- i knew he lived somewhere in southern indiana. i'm calling every phone company. you didn't have google. google search. we didn't have it. and so finally i knew the spelling. so i finally find a spelling with that name outside of terre white nd i call up and a southern voice answers, it's his mother. i say, is -- hi, i'm just

wondering how paul is. is he back? she said, yeah, he's been back a long time. i said i'm a reporter, i want to talk to him. i said, i don't know if he wants to talk to you. i said, is this about the war? i said yes. she said, i don't know. i said, can i come? is it all right? she said, come on down. i don't know what he's going to do. so i took a plane that night, wherever i was, and i go to his town and i drive up, i have a hard time finding the house because it's this ram shackle wooden collection of dilapidated buildings, all wooden shacks, a little bit like you see in the pictures of the plantation life in louisiana and the middle 1900's', at least my fictional memory of what they look like. and there's a chicken farm and the cages were all disarray, you knew there was no man around. the kitchens were all low, the -- there was wire meche half broken. i pull up front, she comes out

and she's about a 55-year-old lady, looks about 75, hard life. this is not norman rock well version of rural life. some of you remember those rockwell pictures of the paintings from "the saturday evening post" that i grew up with long, long ago in another era. another planet. and she says, he's in there. and i said, is it already? -- is it all right? she says, i don't know. and then she says this little old lady, this little old lady that didn't know much about anything so i thought, she says, i sent them a good boy and they sent me back a murderer. how's that? you can go a long career and not have a line like that. and so there, ergo, all the rest is sort of gravy. did story, fame, fortune, glory. probably hurt nixon in a way. could he no longer rally what he called middle america after. that once cali was prosecuted

and found guilty of 21 deaths, and nixon of course commuted his steps. he just did time, you know, in -- he was sequestered in quarters. i don't think he ever got to the level where he should have gone. they all should have gone. there were six officers killing people. all right. that's the story. about getting a story. most of it's pretty good. but you can see along the way there are a lot of times i wasn't particularly straight with lat more. i'll tell you something maze being lat more. i had a friend from law school at chicago who was a wonderful, great lawyer, had a fancy practice in washington. and he and my wife knew him from way back and we were deer friends. when i wrote the first story i was obviously nervous about it and went to see him. he wasa at a very prominent law firm. i said, i have to be able to write -- i'm sending this to newspapers, they don't know who i am. they might have some idea but they don't really know me. i want to say this has been reviewed by so and so, this

fancy law firm, and verify it for not only its accuracy but it's liable-free. i'm sending it overhead-collect. $100 was what we charged. except you had to pay the wire fee. and he said, you know, you should call lat more, his judge. because i was quoting cali. cali talked to me. i found cali. and he talked to me all night. he did something else. he pretended to be sort of -- this is a war, combat, war, but at some point i was in his quarters and i found him. once the kids gave me, i got his address, i found him. it was hard but i found him. he was tucked away in quarters for generals. but that's all right. i found him. and at one point during our conversation, it was an all-night conversation, he went , i e bathroom and he said saw him throw up arterial blood.

he was suffering but he was masking it. he just threw up blood. and so clearly he was suffering. but -- and so i quoted him about what he said. which turned out to be something different than he had said in the various proceedings in the army. and my lawyer said, suppose you got him and he said, you're quoting him but how do you know that you're not going to put him in jail? maybe you should. so i called lattimore up and the last time i talked to george lattimore and i read what i said. he said, oh, my god, look, if you write the story that way he's not going to get a trial. i think you ought -- he ought to have a trial. i said, so do i. he said, i'll make a deal with you. he said, read me your story. i'll check it for accuracy. and i'll go through it very carefully. just say -- instead of saying kelly said to me, say just according to what kelly is known to believe or has said or according to what sources say, just mask the fact that you saw

him directly. give me that -- i made the deal. i said, yep. ok. i don't have to quote him. i can quote what happened. i've seen the charge sheet and i can write that. and he went and corrected the story down to things like the dates, when i arrived, what the official charge was, to the point when later i didn't do it because i don't do that stuff, somebody forwarded the army records and the army concluded from that first story that i had access to the inner workings of the pentagon because it was so completely accurate them. couldn't understand that maybe the judge made it accurate for me. never talked to me again. but reporters called him. that was the other deal. editors from the newspapers that were going to publish it called hip and he said, i can say to you right now that story is ok. that was great. somehow by not always being tough, i walked away from an interview with him and i never wrote about the interview because i said i wouldn't. but it was all right. it turned out to be ok. look, week of talked now for three hours. [laughter]

i think some of these students ought to mull about the fact that at a lot of critical paces i was less than can dids about what i did. that's part of the business. to ike to think -- i want think i did it the way i should. and the big question for me is, i do this fantastic game of what would happen if it was on the desk and all that and most students, they don't even -- if you lock the safe some of them would say get a blow torch and open it but most of them, the first couple of times, in the desk, out of the desk, get it. more of would you have done it initially until you figured out that that wasn't the way to go because the older people, older and wiser know better. but that is one of the perils of what we do. we do get close to the edge. and it's not always wonderful. and some of the things we do are less than marvelous but that's what we do.

i don't think you should misrepresent yourself. and you're not compelled to tell everything. and the truth was, the question i always have, is what i've -- would i have opened that if he'd left it sealed? and i guess i would have. i guess i would have. now i wouldn't. but i've got my medals. i'm like general petraeus. ever see general petraeus' braid me? had about 64 medals he used to walk around with. i don't know how he could walk. [laughter] he must feel liberated now. he didn't have to wear all those medals. so let's do some questions about anything but the story. about the real world, i'll be glad to get myself in real trouble on this stuff. i think things -- i think right now what you're seeing, what i'm seeing is i'm seeing jihadist sunies, whether al qaeda or not, i am not a necessarily believer that there's a magical al qaeda overriding, i see jihadist suedy ral -- sunni fundamentalists from africa, from north africa, to the

middle east, now to south asia and pakistan, going after shi'a. i'm seeing more violence in the last year than we've seen in many years. and i'm not saying it's due to obama's policy or lack of policy, we don't know. but something's going on and it's getting very ugly and my own guess is that we're going to see a bigger explosion in iraq this year. there is american intelligence, a lot of very good american intelligence at the saudis who don't forget are fundamentalist sunnis, radical hardline sunies who have no use for the shi'a. and this is a serious, serious split in the middle east right now. always has been. it's really acute now. they certainly are funding some of the old pro-saddam guys, the sunni bathists. -- baathists in a war against the particle. there's going to be maybe a set-peace war there.

i think maliki will win but there will be a lot more blood. iraq iraq is not done with the torture we put it through. there's a cheerful little statement. yes, ma'am. you're free now to go get your party. it's way past the time. [laughter] as far as i know -- [laughter] >> i'll do 20 or so minutes. feel free to go. there's no plane out of here tonight, is there? [laughter] ok. so i'm here. let's go. >> mr. hersh, my name is david and i'd like to express my tremendous admiration for the work you continue to do. >> you know what i say to people when they do that to me? i always say, i remember the great joke in "the new yorker." it's a cockroach talking to an ant -- to a mouse. and the cockroach says, i love your work. so, it's all relative. some people won't agree with you. let's get on with the

compliments. what's your question. >> you've written extensively about war planes against iran. chuck hagel was ex coreated for using the word containment in hearings. the president says all options are on the table. prime minister netanyahu says the same thing in a more threatening way. what can you tell us about what those options are and what the consequences of a u.s. or israeli strike on iran would be? >> well, i'll tell you, actually as you know i spent a lot of time in the -- in 2005 and 2006 writing about iran and about the threat and the serious conversation in the white house about it, very serious. and i've been doing a book on the chaney white house which is fascinating because it's led me back into ronald reagan's white house, it's led me back into the church economy which brings me back into obama and just in a minute i'll just say, where's the question about let's say assassination used to be? now you have obama saying, hey,

on tuesdays we go to meetings and pick the guys. that's where we've devolved to, if you will. so i actually think -- using the word think, here's what i know. i know that there's a deal on the table. my guess is obama's going to israel, among other reasons, he's going to make the deal. and it's a good deal. the iranians are getting certainly hurt by sanctions and the problem with sanctions is, of course, is the sanctions always -- the economic sanctions we impose always afflict -- they start from the bottom up. and the elite don't get in trouble. and i'll also tell that you as far as i know, fidel castro's been sanctioned economically for 62 years. i don't see him going anywhere. so i'm a skeptic about sanctions because people survive and there's a lot of ways to sell oil. but we are crunching, we're making it harder for the iranians to sell oil to china, you know, they've had some currency deals where they've

been playing games with the turks, with lira, changing it to gold. we're cutting back on some complicated banking ways to squeeds them. the deals -- to squeeze them. the deals have always been on the table. let me say again and again, there is no evidence in the american, british, swedish, german, empirically, no evidence in their intelligence agencies that the iranians have actually done anything to weaponize. there's none. we can't find it. we'd like to think that maybe it's because they're hiding it well but you can't believe how good we are at locating. it's an all-court press. we've done amazing stuff and i've written about some of it. once bush was out of office i felt freer to write about some stuff i know. we're o, you know, sanctioning them to stop them from making a weapon for which we have no intelligence that they're making which is sort of a complicated situation. a deal is on the table.

i would bet by june there's going to be very serious talking. and i think one reason he's going to go -- he's going to see b.b., certainly the most rational of leaders in the to see b.b. oing in israel in late march and about about a month from now, i would guess that one of the issues is going to be the help them climb down off the ladder. i also think the most serious issue we have going now is syria and i'll give you another guess. who's going to end up bailing out bashar? the israelis. and i'll tell you why. because the last thing they want are crazies on their border. and if you remember, in 1982, i know some of you don't remember, there was some terrible stuff happening, when it looked like the p.l.o. was going to take over southern lebanon which is on the border of northern israel. the israelis went into the camps, there was bombing like crazy. they went nuts with the prospect of having a radical

p.l.o. on their border. i think they misread the p.l.o. but history seems to suggest they did. there was more chance for a serious agreement. so the last thing the israelis want and some very interesting little things you see, recently seven senior wounded officers of the syrian army were admitted to israel for treatment. and also the border, the israelis have -- there's a lot of reason to think the last thing the israelis want is a with a habby muslim brotherhood, radical end of it, there's all swords -- sorts of different degrees of the brotherhood, running stuff in syria. and to its credit, everything i know -- i think i know about obama, i do know that obama's been very, very skeptical of putting in serious arms into syria. that's because our c.i.a. which has a lot of smart people in it, and don't underestimate us. i'm critical of my government,

we can do a lot of very smart things, too. along with an awful lot of dumb things. but we do smart things, too. we pretty much know that -- and we've known for a couple of years that there's -- this trouble in syria is not just simply legitimate -- i mean, and there is legitimate grievances against them because he and his father ran that country and he was putting people into jail for saying bad things about him. he was better than his father, but he hadn't moved nearly enough. and so i think we're going to see israel being much more passive. the one guy that tells us the sticker where the sun don't shine about syria is putin. we have a real problem with russia too because russia is moran ty american than ever. the whole thing about adoptions a reflection of a growing anti-americanism in russia. that's who we should stop because that's very dangerous for everybody. i think obama, if obama's free enough to play golf with tiger, he can do anything he wants now. [laughter] let's do some more.

somebody else. if that's all you got, i'm going to go home. so come on. yes, ma'am. >> hi. i'm sorry that you missed our class because we all got plenty of questions to ask you. >> you want to know my defense? >> no. >> your 4:00 class? i was never told about it. >> i'm sorry about that. >> so am i. you were waiting for me. i didn't know it. i was busy napping. [laughter] >> oh, ok. so, my question is, do you think the fall of david or is s is a coincidence it reflecting the declining culture of the u.s. army? >> no, it's a one-off in a way. he was out of the army. petraeus was actually -- he left because he left but he was

actually interviewing at the time, he was interviewing at princeton where he had gotten his doctorate as he told everybody constantly, king david they called him in the army, he wasn't popular in the army. he was on his -- he was pretty much done. he was -- my understanding is he was told he would not be chairman of the joint chiefs and he was not going to be chief of staff for the army and so the c.i.a. was a bad fit for him. he wasn't popular there with the personnel. if every senior officer in america were to be fired because he had an affair, we'd be fighting the army with sergeants. [laughter] so, clearly there's more to it than that. there's more to it than that. the same for general allen. it's more to it than that. i don't know the whole story. let me assure you that he was going to go but he wanted to go on his terms. and he is smart.

i stayed away from him, reporters, he was tremendous at the one thing that you really have to be good at if you want to be a successful person in washington, he woulded the press. he was always going to lunches with people. i remember i used to be asked all the time to go to lurch with him and i don't do that -- lunch with him and i don't do that. i don't socialize with people i report on. >> who do you think, if you believe it's true, who do you think was the target of the assassination by what came out in -- supposedly by cheney the illegal op that was paid for with all that cash they flew to iraq? >> what assassination are you talking about? >> supposedly cheney ran an assassination team -- >> no, what -- what happened is there was a general named mcchrystal who was running something called the joint special operations command.

one of the things about america that's sort of interesting is the way we have devolved. it's really cool. the way do you it is you have your own army, you raise your own money, you don't bother with congress, there's no oversight, to hell with congress. and you don't, you know, and you don't tell anybody what you're doing. and it's a pretty cool deal. and we see this pattern, cheney was not the first to do it. he was sort of a copycat. what he was doing is they would fine what they considered to be bad guys and they would authorize executive action. mcchrystal would -- in the early days he would want to be sure it's ok. and then late tier just became he didn't need ok's. you just find a bad guy and there was battlefield executions or what you will. or you bring them to an assault pit, what they called them, these black prisons, which i'm sorry to tell you, still exist more than you believe. and you beat the hell out of

them and let them die or bleed to death. so it's ugly stuff that we know a lot about. but not everything about it. so it wasn't like the targets we were talking about were people we believed to be al qaeda or guys against us. and often we paid for that information which is really strange of the most of the early guys that went to guantanamo, this prison that, am i right, it still exists? although it's the single biggest black mark we have, that and the drones and the predator killings are going to make it almost impossible for to us ever come out of this war against terror in some reasonable way, it seems to me. until we figure out some other way of dealing with the problems we have, other than trying to snuff everybody. or put them in jail. and that's what they do in gitmo. the longer they keep gitmo there, some people have been there for 10 or 11 years without due process. this is america. anyway, there's nothing specific i have to say to you about that. i just don't know. there was some -- there was certainly -- cheney believed he

had the authority, the notion of the unitary were the, -- president, that the president of the united states has executive power, he doesn't have to deal with the justice department, there's certain bad people that we identify and he has the power to deal with them and that's what he was doing. you see that, that's been his mantra since he was in the congress even. but i don't know anything about -- it's not like he said, you know, i owe this guy a lot of money from a poker game last night. [laughter] although, with the phoenix program in vietnam, when we did target assassinationed, -- assassinations, often we got names from somebody who did lose in cards to somebody and we'd go whack them on behalf of someone. it was really strange. as far as he was concerned, it was all for the good of america. >> but we partly allowed that when we let them send billions of dollars of cash there, that was money for illegal ops. you know, you don't -- >> you mean, the millions of dollars, you're talking about the oil money? >> no, the government.

sent over -- we said it was to bribe the sunies and other things like that. they sent over like a couple billion in cash. >> no, what happened was there was a lot of money, oil money, when saddam hussein -- after the war in 1991 war, there was a peace treaty and saddam hussein was under sanctions. and he still had oil to sell. and a certain amount of that oil he could use the money from that to buy food and, etc., but of course it was -- a lot of it dwindled down, it wasn't dripping the down the way it should have or the way we envisioned it. a lot of money we held and it was some of the oil money in our treasury. we had billions of dollars of their money and that's the money you're probably talking about. there was no -- know, you got to remember one thing. 9/11 happened and in november, about two months after 9/11, congress authorized, get this figure, $11.8 billion for the

war on terror. $11.8 billion. what i'm telling you is just there in the books, took me about four years to get o.m.b., the office of management and budget, to get an accounting and to get an accounting out of the foreign aid program in the senate. the senate foreign aid subcommittee. i finally got latesting and it would be like project k, $600 million. i mean, there was just -- you didn't have to worry about going to congress for money. you had it all over the place. could you do anything you wanted. it was a dream. it was a dream. and oversight has disappeared in america. here's cheney, here's brennan testifying about the c.i.a. and just sort of having fun with them. you know, what can i tell you? no tough questions, maybe in camera they did better than in public. but the guy on tuesday is

sitting with the president picking who is going to live and who's going to die and you think maybe they'd ask a few more questions about it. we've gone a long way. we should do a few more. these four and then i'm going to let everybody go to their party. >> ifes going to say, we're just going to do the one more question here. >> what? >> we're just going to do the one more question here. >> well, we got two. >> all right. i've given everybody -- you're free to move. you can go home. yes, ma'am. >> hi. i guess my question is a little bit private. >> was i supposed to be at your class, too? >> yes. >> the same thing. so, as a reporter, i know -- i'm sure you certainly have heard enough bad things so i'm just wondering, have you ever changed your religious belief -- >> your what? >> religious belief before and after you became a journalist? >> you know, i'm not big on psycho analyzing myself.

i'm just not. have a don't -- i family. i don't ever write about them or talk about them. and i i am what i am. i'm not offended. that is a reasonable question. if you asked me if i changed my belief in philosophy, i might have a go at it, but not on a personal level. -- actually, for some very practical reasons. onwould you comment america's disgracin increasing f drones? >> i did. every strategic study done on

the use of air power shows it is counter productive. ofdid a study of the bombing the germans. all of the bombing of civilian targets increased the capacity to produce weapons and an intensity and support of the government increase. counterproductive. most of the cia are from by this bestial joint operations command. special jointthe operations command. they are getting combat medals for dropping bombs a remote control. .- by remote control we can fight a war against these people.

bombedll clinton yugoslavia in 1999, i will give you a fact -- he was the first american president since world war ii to bomb white people. figure that out. last question. >> in investigative journalism, you run into a lot of situations. >> speak. >> can you hear me better? >> go ahead. >> in investigative journalism, you can choose to work with anonymous sources. where do you draw the line on that? for criticize myself anonymous sources. it is terrible. i love to name everyone, but they would all be put in jail. [laughter] anonymoususe the

sources and where do draw the line? istake the new yorker, which an amazing place to work. the final person in fairly is a grammarian. -- in general is a grammarian. one was a last time someone talked about parallelism? you have to deal with that eventually. anyone who deals with me knows that they have to talk independently and separately to a new yorker fact checker. the people i deal with are known to my editor and the new york fact checkers. google new york fact checkers. thatmcphee wrote a piece was an homage to them. they are really good. they checked the mundane things you always miss. they talk to people directly. it is often complicated.

they have fact checkers. there has never been a league or abuse. yes, they are anonymous, but they are known -- there has never been a leak or abuse. yes, the anonymous, but they to be -- .hat mitigates the issue i'm doing a book now that lawyers will get a chance to talk to and when they want to. i have hired independent fact t make stupido noi do no mistakes. . am always amazed her example, the new york times. every day they lead a story all the chinese are behind

the cyber spying according to a highly informed government official. every day they do it. they had is at cozy up to people. .ou cannot be antagonistic the new york times of a story about how the president picks targets with a good judgment of john brennan. i'm sure he rationalize that one, i do not know how, but he did. -- methodline mythology summe oly som somewhere. >> what a society we are. here is an election for the presidency and the target area, 5% of the independents who do

not know if they are democrats or republicans in most cases, many do not know which side they are. they do not know what the issues are. that is who they play two. play to.lay -- we fact check it. i have sources. it is also a system of enormous use. you can say that it is a high- level source. if they name the person they talk to, it would rather say anonymous high official. as headritten a piece of the major of the defense

policy board under bush and .heney this man spent much of his -- he usesg negotiations as an insider and on this board, this defense policy board. they have access to everything to try to strike a deal for a huge billion dollar project to build a fence between yemen and saudi arabia. that is when he called me a terrorist. i take that as a compliment. [laughter] ands actually very smart quite engaging. that is the way it goes. the answer to your question is, yeah. it is a big issue. not for me since i have never done anything wrong in my life, like all the people i write about. [laughter]

goodbye. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> actress mariska hargitay spoke about empowering survivors of sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse. she's also the founder of the joyful heart foundation,, an organization with the mission to help victims. this is just under an hour. >> i am so honored and thrilled to be here today. thank you, angela. reminding me of the old days. [laughter] my heart is beating, and it is such an honor, thrilled to be here for so many reasons. i just came from standing with the vice president and attorney general holder at a press conference to highlight the dire and immediate need to reduce domestic violence homicides. and now here i am with all of

you in washington d.c., a very exciting day. the kind of day that makes your diary burst into flames when you write about it. i have to tell you that i whipped out my cell phone and took a selfie with the vp. [laughter] you understand that i own the honor of being here today to a very sweet woman. where are you? hiding. there you are. i wanted to point that out to everybody family's daughter. i want to thank you for throwing mining into the ring. -- my name inoto the ring. i also understand that you want to be a prosecutor when you grow up . i thank you in advance for everything you're going to do with your life.

the website for the national press club describes this as a place where news breaks out and flows out into the world. where journalists trained to become the next generation of storytellers. all that serves to reinforce not only what a huge and and great honor this is to be here, but also the scope of this opportunity and the importance of this moment and this day. also says on the website that the stakes and be higher. -- couldn't be higher. i cannot agree more. when i i was thinking about what i wanted to say here today, and this place where news flows out into the world, i thought about my first encounter with the statistics of sexual assault and domestic violence and child abuse. it was almost 15 years ago, i hate to say. i was doing research for my role on "svu" and there they were. if you'll bear with me, i would like to repeat them, even though angela has already sent them.

-- said them. i think there are worth repeating and repeating. in this country, one in three women experience physical or sexual abuse by an intimate partner in her lifetime. one in four girls and one in six boys are sexually abused by the age of 18. every two minutes in the united states, somebody sexually assaulted. every nine seconds, a woman is beaten. every day, more than three women are killed by an intimate partner. and everyday, five children die of abuse and neglect. the statistics went on, and then the letters came. at first there were a few, then there were more, than there were hundreds, and since then there have been thousands, sadly. women and men writing newsletters to me did not ask for an an autograph, a headshot, they just goes your stories of abuse to me. -- they disclosed their stories

of abuse to me. majority of them had some version of the phrase, i have never told this to anyone. there i was, holding in my hands, the stories behind the statistics that i had just learned. there i was at work every day, having these issues pressed into my soul. pressed into my consciousness. they were imprinted on it. they changed my thinking. so i educated myself, i trained to become a rape crisis advocate area joined a few boards, i got involved. i am so proud to be on a show that was brave enough to go into a territory that nobody else is talking about. obviously, i had my role to play on television, but after learning what i learned in hearing the statistics in receiving these letters, i knew that i wanted to do more. i wanted to play a larger role in helping survivors heal and reclaim their lives. in 2004, i started the joyful

heart foundation. our mission is to heal, and power and educate survivors of the mystic, sexual assault, and child abuse. xual assuault,c, sec and child abuse. and shed light on the darkness that surrounds these issues. i get emotional. because of our ceo, we have raised more than $10 million -- [applause] thank you. let me try that again. we have raised over $10 million in private funds and served directly over 10,000 survivors and the professionals who care for them. we have connected with over one million individuals through our education and awareness initiatives and have championed crucial legislation and policy reform, which i am very proud of.

to get justice for survivors. while i am not an expert on these issues, i proudly claim the title of advocate. in the literal sense of the word. one who calls out to you. that is my inner self clapping for myself, did you hear that? [laughter] ok. one who calls out for you on behalf of the thousands of survivors whose voices, courage, hope, that i am honored to bring into this room with me today. today i want to talk about gardening. how was that for a left turn? when you buy a plant, it comes with instructions. it says, requires watering daily.

thrives in sunlight. if the issues of domestic violence and sexual assault, and child abuse can with a label on them to how to make them grow in society, it would say, requires darkness, thrives in darkness. silence, fear, shame, and isolation. silence allows criminals to thrive. think about how helpful it is for each one of us -- how helpful it is to a criminal, if we are not willing to talk about these crimes. and this is not about the victims who refused to come forward. i'm talking about everybody else. all of us here in this room. think about how helpful it is for a rapist if we consider rape

an unseemly topic, one that is too frightening, that is too complex, one that is too murky, too difficult to prosecute, or simply not worth it. what kind of society do we end up with? we end up with a society where, after 40 years plus, you can still count on one hand a number of corporations funding these issues in any significant way. many of you are here today, and i want to say thank you for that. we end up with a society where schools and institutions settle cases of sexual violence with as little transparency, as little accountability, and as little exposure as possible. a society where it is so hard for the antiviolence movement come together because, in order to compete for limited funding, organizations must stand out. by definition, it must stand alone. we end up with a society where, although, thank god, congress recently reauthorize the

violence against women act, thank god -- [applause] what we end up with a society where, 22 senators and 138 congressman voted against it. it is unconscionable. it's unconscionable. we end up in a society where, after a victim has been raped or beaten at the hand of a spouse, after the devastation of the trauma, she has to live through the trauma of how society receives her. she has to survive the trauma of, we don't want to deal with that. we don't want to talk about that. she has to live through the trauma of, what was she wearing? why was she dancing like that? why was she out so late? what did she expect?

she was asking for it. i'm sure he didn't mean it. he is such a nice guy. why didn't she just leave? to me, one of the most shocking demonstrations of how we regard crime in our society is the backlog of untested sexual assault evidence kits. rape kits. which are sitting in police storage facilities across the country. both because i feel compelled to talk about it every chance i get, and because it is such a clear and concrete example, please allow me to dig down into this issue for a second. everyday in the united states, individuals take these enormously courageous steps of reporting their rape to the police. because of what they have

suffered, their bodies are a living, breathing crime scene from which doctors and nurses collect a rape kit. this process of evidence collection takes between 4-6 hours. if somebody endures a 4-6 hour invasive exam, that evidence would be tested. it can affirm the survivor's attack of the story. discredit the attacker. connect the suspect to other crimes. say that one again -- connect the suspect to other crimes. i should say the third time, really. you have got to get this one. they can also exonerate innocent. the bottom line here, a rape kit can bring justice. often an integral part of a survivor.

it is vital in keeping rapist off the street. yes, federal authorities estimate that there are hundreds of thousands of untested rape kits across the country. hundreds of thousands. i don't get it. polly hoskins is a leading sexual violence advocate perfectly summed it up when she said, if you have stacks of physical evidence of a crime and you are not doing everything you can with this evidence, then you must be making a decision that this isn't a very serious crime. here is the good news. jurisdictions have started to see the results of testing every single rape kit. new york city cleared its backlog of 70,000 kits and now tests every single kit that comes in. the proof of the value of testing every kit -- their

arrest rate for rape jumped from 40% to 70% compared -- [applause] right? huge! compared with only 24% nationally. fight with statistics. within the past two years, los angeles have also cleared its backlog of 12,669 kits. and then there's detroit . and the unbelievable wayne county prosecutor, ms. kim worthy -- [applause] who is here with me on the dais. i really want to be you when i grow up. it takes us seven days to shoot an episode.

her office handles thousands of cases per year -- and she did not have a full-time unit to prosecute crimes until just under two years ago. now, only has six assistant prosecutors, three investigators and one victim advocate. for 70,000 cases a year. she is a mother of two, just saying. [laughter] in 2009, her office discovered that there are more than 11,000 rape kits rotting, literally, in a storage room in the detroit police department. the national institute of justice, lynn rosenthal and chris rose, who are also with me today on the dais, addressed the backlog. and god. -- thank god. the joyful heart are so proud to

partner with them on this work. just weeks ago, when the first 400 kids were tested and entered into the national dna database, law enforcement were able to identify 29 serial rapists. [applause] it is huge. that is only out of the first 400. we are talking about hundreds of thousands. that just goes to show you and makes you think about what could have not been. one of the kids in detroit belonged to a young mother who was raped at gunpoint in her bed while her two young children were sleeping next to her. immediately following the attack, she bravely called the police and went to the hospital, where evidence was collected from her body. in her words, said, i have no choice, the only way that i had of getting the person on the

street was to go. the rape kit was tested, 14 years later. 14 years. when a prosecutor finally told her that they had identified a rapist, she courageously moved forward with the prosecution. her attacker was found guilty and sentenced up to 60 years in prison. that is the happy ending of that story. detroit has nearly 10,000 untested rape kits remaining. the city's financial woes are making national headlines. joyful heart is also working with kim's office to explore how to raise the 12-$15 million it would need to finish the backlog. the detroit commission is also set up a fund to which individuals from all over the country have already given $40,000, many intonations of $10 and $20 increments.

from survivors in detroit i want to help, people who just want justice, people want their rapists off the street. people who want to send a message that rapist will be accountable for their crimes. where does that leave us? does it leave us defeated? no. it leaves us with where we are today. as a society. today, as a society, we say, no more. everyone say it with me. no more. for the first time, nearly every organization that is working to change the haunting statistics behind these preventable crimes, whether the organization focus is on women and girls, men and boys, teens, children, rural or

urban communities, it is coming together in a movement, united under one symbol. no more. peace has its peace sign, and the red ribbon demands action for aids, and a pink ribbon has changed the way we think about breast cancer. and now, our collective commitment is to end sexual assault and domestic violence. it now has its own symbol, it's sign, it's beacon. it is not an initiative, it is not a campaign, it is a call to action. it is a movement to stand up and began out for every woman, man, every child who is suffering from this violence. in a movement for every victim struggling to find their voice perpetrators have relied on the fact that the movement to stop them would not come together.

they have relied on the fragmentation, they depend on fear and silence, to keep doing what they are doing. no more seeks to remove the shame and stigma around surviving these issues. to make these issues easier for people to talk about what we're doing here today. and to empower bystanders in every community to get involved in preventing them. you think, what am i going to do? how am i going to get involved? that is what this is. it is for everybody to get involved. no more leaving it for others to find the answers. no more blaming survivors. no more standing by and doing nothing. no more has been years in the making. what began as an idea three years ago, today has become a reality. people align themselves with this movement and the cause gains visibility. policymakers will take notice.

leading to stronger public policies and more funding for prevention of services. this means more funding for places like wayne county and kim worthy who need it. more funding for survivors to have their rape kits tested. together, we can end domestic violence and sexual assault. together. today, you have the opportunity to play a role. it is simple, really. each of you has been given a pin displaying the no more symbol, i am asking you to wear it. simple as that, wear it. i am asking you to share it and at least some of you in this

room question whether this will work. understandably. the closest corollary i can give you is the aids ribbon. aids was an issue that nobody wanted to talk about. it concerns sexual behavior and drug abuse, and people blamed there was a lot of stigma around it. : people started wearing the aids ribbon, it moves the issue into the open. it urged people, it encouraged the conversation, discussion, and ultimately contributed to a better place for policies, progress and for combating the illness. making aids-related discrimination less acceptable. that is our wish for no more. it begins here today in this room. in this room here, today. it is a moment. a big one. so -- anyway, we all have a role to play in this. i deeply encourage you to play yours. to end domestic violence and sexual assault. it may not happen in my lifetime, but i am committed to doing my part in bringing that about.

conversations like this are happening all over the city today in capitol hill, on twitter, and speaking of playing a role -- the wizards are playing the milwaukee bucks in a game dedicated to no more tonight. is this what a day looks like when these issues are pressed, the way they ought to be pressed. ideas that were deliberately. t word deliberately. i believe that is our job. yours and mine, to press areas we must press things out into the light. we must press our fingers on the button of the bullhorn to make the world listen. as members of the national press club, i urge you, leaves, to press on and teach the next generation to do the same.

i just want to say that when i started out on this journey, i was an actress, and very happy that i had landed a gig on a tv show. [laughter] truly. i did not know that i would start a foundation. i didn't know that joyful heart would have a place in the first- ever white house roundtable on sexual violence. i did not know that i would testify before congress. i did not know that i would ever get to meet the president and stand with joe biden, my hero, who wrote the original legislation. i did not know that i would have the privilege of seeing survivors take the courageous steps toward healing and reclaiming their lives. in short, i did not know i would be here today. as i watch my diary burst into flames tonight, i will celebrate all of these things. and most of all, perhaps, i will celebrate the things that we all don't know yet but are within reach.

if we persevere, if we press on, again, in the national press club's very wise words, the stakes could not be higher. thank you. [applause] >> thank you very much. we have a lot of questions on several different topics. catch your breath. get a drink of water, and come on back up. [laughter]

there are no questions about makeup. >> darn it. >> first question -- there are many causes out there. lots of good ones. why the no more movement? >> i think that we are stronger in numbers. we are more powerful in numbers. education, illumination, learning about how -- through my job, what i have learned and how these issues have pressed into me, as i started the joyful

heart foundation, i seen so many different organizations vying for the same things. i think that dilutes. it is about unity and coming together. i have seen the way coming together and rallying around a cause and a survivor makes change. when a group of like-minded people come together, a change is made. >> where did you learn about the rape kit backlog? who talk a lot about what it is, why it matters, how did you learn about that initially and why did you pick that is one thing to focus on? and follow-up on that -- where besides detroit is progress still needed to be made on that front? >> the first part, where a the learned about

rape kit backlog was miley, the ceo joyful heart had just come back from meeting with sarah, the expert on it. when i learned about -- one assumes that if somebody gets the evidence that can seek justice, you assume -- and i was so horrified and mortified. truly, in disbelief. pained for everyone knowing that justice was not being served in this way. i thought, as i said, it is a perfect microcosm of how these issues are regarded. kim and sarah -- kim and sarah can speak about where the other places are like detroit, if i may invite you up to answer that. >> thank you. that is a great question. where else -- what other cities

are struggling with untested rape kits on the backlog? the big answer is, we are not sure. we only have estimates that the moment. but she said earlier, hundreds of thousands of untested kits. perhaps in police storage facilities across the country. the fact is, very few, only two states actually track what happens to rape kits. once they are collected from victims. as the the state of illinois and the state of texas. -- that would be the state the state of tend xas. very few other cities. we are not sure. one of our big reform pushes is to get the federal government and other states to require that police report out publicly what they are actually doing with rape kits. in our experience, once a city announces a rape kit backlog, we can find the resources and

political will and public outrage to make the changes that are needed. i can say that every city we have ever looks at, anyone we have ever asked for numbers, has ended up with backlogs at a minimum of 1000 or so, but usually in the multiple thousands. 10,000 or so. lots of cities are struggling with this. those that haven't knowledged it, like los angeles or new york or cleveland or detroit or houston, dallas, those are cities that have publicly acknowledged backlogs and are actively taking steps to fix it. it is just too embarrassing not to. >> i am kim worthy, the wayne county prosecutor. you assume that cities report when they do them. there was a study done five years ago when i found untested backlog rape kits in 49 out of the 50 states.

the biggest problem is getting people to a knowledge problem. people try to sweep it under the rug once they found them. >> our next question is for the subject matter experts, as well. feel free to throw it back. what does it cost to test a single rape kit and what exactly is involved in the testing? is that dna testing or more to it than that? >> i would love chris to answer that. in terms of what it actually means to test a kits. the general cost is roughly -- you hear lots of different estimates between $1000 and $1500. that is a general estimate. it is expensive. but we have also -- our experience is that it is not just about the resources. once the community commits to and prioritizes testing, they find a way to find the money. >> i am chris rose, deputy director at the national institute of justice, the research arm at the u.s. department of justice. sarah is right, the testing of a

rape kit, dna testing can cost anywhere between $1000 and $1500, i would say. we at the national institute of justice, i will give us a little bit of a plug, are working towards faster and cheaper ways of doing that. once you can get that kind of thing in place, along with a number of other things, because this is a multifaceted problem, then we can really make some progress and move things along quicker. >> thank you. turning now to the show. questioner says, your tv character influenced your thinking and your advocacy. how much do you influence your character and the content of your show? [laughter] >> i like the question. [applause] [laughter] i would say it is 50-50.

and it is to talk about olivia benson, i would say, i have learned so much from her. she is -- excuse me for reaching. she has -- it can still be polite. that is sort of her motto, fearlessness. it is not that she doesn't have to fear, it is that she does it anyway. it is not about her, she is a mama bear. a lioness. what has been so exciting about this process and about me needing to do something from my outrage, and if i could just say, sarah and tim, for me, i was a civilian. i learned about the rape kit backlog and was like -- what? i cannot believe it. everybody i have told that has responded the same way. we assume -- you just assume you get a rape kit done that it gets tested. when you learn about all the

things and why they don't, it is a call to action. it pushes you into action. in terms of olivia, at first i wanted to do something. she influenced me. and now, with my stellar a-team behind me at joyful heart, they have helped increase the show. now, our show runner, warren, is such an incredibly great man and understands the value and the platform of the knowledge that we have access to. because of that, we have done shows about it. there will be times when i will read a script and say, this is an opportunity or let me have our expert on that. or, kim, can healthy with these statistics? -- can you help me with these statistics?

did a show on the rape kit backlog. we have done so much about a survivor and what happened and the process and the answer to your estimate of what -- what does the rape kit entail? we showed it, because people just do not know. there have been many places where now joyful heart is aiding the show and supporting the show. our original executive producer was also a board member. i think people with a soul that are bright to please men, understanding platform may have and the power in educating. i hope that answers your question. >> yes. given your advocacy and your position with the important topic, how did you respond to having mike tyson guest star on the show? what was it like to have him on the set with you?

>> ultimately, i think that the episode was a very powerful episode. my response was, i did not know that they had cast mike tyson originally. initially. where my concern lie was how survivors would respond. my concern was -- i understood their confusion and why they would be hurt and confused by this choice. that is what i wanted to take care of, survivors who often, in the past, have not had a voice. i wanted to make sure that they had one. that is why we stood about joyful heart and made the statement that we did. again, life is complex. i don't know all the cases of all the moving parts, but i thought the episode was compelling and powerful and the end of the day, it told a beautiful story. >> are there any other shows in hollywood that you think you're

doing a good job shining light on this subject that her onto -- that are also on tv now? >> that is a great question. i have 14 children. i don't really watch tv. that is the truth. [laughter] i am trying to think there are any shows. nothing comes to mind right now. that's -- if i think of something, i will let you know. [laughter] i just don't watch television. >> tv often lacks the new one in detail of real life. detail of rea ll life. what do you think is the most unrealistic part of paper trail of sexual assault or domestic violence on "svu" either of what you show or do not show?

>> what is the most unrealistic part? sarah? ok. yeah, i will say it. um -- i think that olivia benson and the members of the special victims unit on "svu" are extremely compassionate and well-versed in these issues and knowledgeable and empathetic. and, maybe sometimes, not every survivor or victim is met with the compassion and respect that they should be met with. >> there was a -- >> may i?

it is a big question and there are many issues. scu detectives -- suv detectives do not deal with homicide. that is the first ring. in the show, we have 42 minutes to tell a story. i deal with homicide on the show that are linked. most people know that. a homicide is a homicide, a sexual assault come a domestic violence is a different thing. what i want to say is -- i just went off on a tangent and forgot what i wanted to say. ah -- when i first got this role, you think, how can i do research to play this character with the integrity that i wanted to play her? going on right along and hanging out in precincts, and modeling

myself after a few svu detectives that i met and i thought they were amazing, powerhouses in doing their job and would never stop at anything. i wanted to be like that. but in addition, the specific night that i learned the statistics, my boss was being honored by an organization at mount sinai, they had a dinner called the silver whistle dinner. that is the night that i learned these statistics. then i learned a rape kits -- rape crisis counselors and rape crisis advocates. i went to that training to become that and learning what i learned there and how to deal, respectfully and kindly, with survivors, the way the district they deserve to be, really infused my character. i wish that all cops, all detectives, all special victims unit detectives, -- or all cops, really, the could understand the compassion that -- i said one

time, how would you feel if your bike got stolen? your house was robbed? in the top just you and w and did not treat you with respect. youand the cop did not treat with respect? it is about respect. that is an important part. >> violence in the media has been in the news a lot. in recent months and, obviously "svu" is, i'm assuming, not a program you watch with your children. how do you do activism and trying to curb violence in real life with the fact that the show is a violent show on television? >> i think that when material is dealt with responsibly and when consequences and accountability are shown, -- when violence is

gratuitous and out there, and people imitate it when there are no consequences. and things get you into a crazy fervor, i think that "svu" brings to light issues that have not been talked about. you see people having to take accountability. that is the part that puts it through a different lens. you are having people talk about issues that they normally don't talk about, and then showing perpetrators the consequences. the beauty of joyful heart in that way is that, with olivia benson and the entertainment component, combined with what we are all doing in this room and the power of this unity, it is

going to change everything. if we say to perpetrators, i will not stand by and watch what you do. i will not not tell. i am involved. i see you. i am watching you. now i am going to take accountability. it is our problem. there is no more, who am i to get involved? who are you to get involved? you are a human being that is watching violence, witnessing somebody being hurt. it is about accountability. it is about connecting to our responsibility as a human being. [applause] >> get me all hot and bothered. [laughter] you'll watch the the show go, she is mad now. [laughter] she's not kidding, she means this.

we have an active online audience today. i will ask one of the questions that has come in via twitter. this person asks, what advice do you give to someone who would like to report their rapes? >> what advice would i give that want to report their rape? first of all i would say, you are so strong and i admire you so much and there are people that want to help you and you are not alone. and i applaud you. and you are changing the world in preventing this from happening to other people. we are unifying to do everything we can so this does not happen again. do you want to add anything? thank you.

>> we are here in washington, of course, and you mention that the violence against women act was just reauthorized. what would you say is the next political priority for you in washington or in state legislatures? >> for me? there is a lot to be dealt with, isn't there. for me, we have our focus right now on the rape kit backlog. we are going to stay focused and we certainly are very ambitious, as you have heard what joyful heart wants to do and we want to partner with other organizations. we are not going to stop until we do. for me, right now, the most important thing is about educating and locking arms with people so they don't say, what can i do? i want people to know what they can do and feel empowered and realize how much power they do have to say something. to speak up for somebody.

and hopefully, what the symbol is, i think the breast cancer analogy is so beautiful to me. when i see, breast cancer used to be a thing -- don't talk about that. now, you see people wearing the pink ribbon, and i always feel like -- rockstar. they are so proud. you see somebody that survived breast cancer and you want to jump on the bandwagon and support. you look at them differently and admire them and they are so empowered. whether it is breast cancer, are all the different things, once you have survived it, you are empowered. so let's unify around these issues and make it something that we all talk about, so our kids know how to keep themselves safe, so women fill supported, so men go, that is not ok. do we stop blaming other people and aching responsibility.

we stop blaming other people and start taking responsibility. this morning, listening to president biden, he said that if a woman runs across the field naked, you can arrest her for indecent exposure, but that does not give you the right to rape her. the point is, let's stop blaming rape exams and putting the blame there and take it on ourselves. teaching, men, women, children, about the fact that people deserve to live a violent free life. how about that? [applause] >> we are seeing more and more celebrities come to washington to lobby for a cause. while some might think it is publicity, why do you think it is important for you to come to the capital and you worry about celebrity backlash for the issuer? >> no, i do not worry about that at all.

i think i have been given an incredible opportunity as far as i can understand issues from where i stand as an actor and where i stand as a person in the spot that i am. i have dealt with these issues. i have seen power of community and how it affects survivors. i have seen lives changed and have seen people that their lives back and have seen people begin again. it has moved me deeply. after also seen people they were victims of sexual assault and domestic violence give up. i used to describe it as seeing the lights go out.

they do not think they are worthy because someone did something to them. how is that right? they are not worthy. not you. whoncourage the survivor may have a skewed vision of their beauty and their worth, sometimes you need to refocus the blame and where it needs to be. how convenient is it for a perpetrator if we are not talking about it? we are saying it does not important. go ahead and do it again. by educating people who do not know about it, they will not have that much leeway. they will not have it. i feel moved by my heroes who are making a difference. andworthy and sarah everyone and joyful heart that is devoted to joyful heart.

when i stood around the people brainstorming, this is a train i want to get on. celebrity backlash, not so much. i'm in for the long haul. [applause] >> would you ever run for public office yourself? [laughter] >> that is a good one. you know, i could get used to it appear. -- up here. [laughter] >> we are almost out of time.

i would like to remind you about our upcoming luncheon speakers. march 15, we have thomas drake, national security administration whistleblower. he will be our sunshine week speaker. march 18, a special speakers .reakfast we will talk about the forward strategy of the republican party. march 20, the president and ceo of the united nations foundation. she will discuss the public charities and work supporting the programs of the united nations. second, i will present our guest with the traditional national press club. -- mug. hanks. [applause] >> we always wrap up with one final question and has to be about the show.

will you still be doing "suv" next year? >> you little devil. [laughter] . certainly hope so [applause] >> thank you for coming. i would also like to thank national press club staff for organizing the event or today. more information about the national press club on our website. if you want a program today's .rogram, go to press.org thank you. we are entered. -- adjourned. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> i just want tco